git packaging workflow notes, diagram
Hi all, I've had a few discussions with people about the git workflow for packaging. I've now made a diagram about this that may be useful for people, it is relevant to autotools projects in particular: http://danielpocock.com/autotools-project-distribution-and-packaging-on-debian Please let me know if anything could be clarified further Regards, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/515d3207.1000...@pocock.com.au
Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
On 04/04/2013 09:55, Daniel Pocock wrote: Hi all, I've had a few discussions with people about the git workflow for packaging. I've now made a diagram about this that may be useful for people, it is relevant to autotools projects in particular: http://danielpocock.com/autotools-project-distribution-and-packaging-on-debian Please let me know if anything could be clarified further Conondrum can be solved, as explained today by Russ Allbery : http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/journal/2013-04/001.html -- Jérémy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/515d34a4.4070...@melix.org
Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
On 04/04/13 10:07, Jérémy Lal wrote: On 04/04/2013 09:55, Daniel Pocock wrote: Hi all, I've had a few discussions with people about the git workflow for packaging. I've now made a diagram about this that may be useful for people, it is relevant to autotools projects in particular: http://danielpocock.com/autotools-project-distribution-and-packaging-on-debian Please let me know if anything could be clarified further Conondrum can be solved, as explained today by Russ Allbery : http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/journal/2013-04/001.html I actually think that the comments from Joey and Russ are both very valuable and it would be good to get everything together into a single document that explains both the dual-repository approach and the combined approach. My comments were not intended to (and do not prevent) what either of them is proposing. Certainly, it was meant to raise awareness of the fact that files from the upstream tarball may not be in upstream's tag: and I simply provide one way of dealing with it, a method that is used a lot and that was what I came across at the time I started contributing packages to Debian. Obviously the combined approach (Russ) is really only possible if upstream uses git, because of it's distributed nature. The dual-repository approach remains relevant if upstream is on CVS or SVN and the Debian packages are to be maintained with git. I'm happy to work some of this feedback and links to the other posts into my own blog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/515d4421.7010...@pocock.com.au
Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 11:13:05AM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote: Obviously the combined approach (Russ) is really only possible if upstream uses git, because of it's distributed nature. Why is the distributed nature important here? The dual-repository approach remains relevant if upstream is on CVS or SVN and the Debian packages are to be maintained with git. You can use git-svn and similar tools to have the upstream VCS history in your Debian repo. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 11:13:05 +0200 Daniel Pocock dan...@pocock.com.au wrote: On 04/04/13 10:07, Jérémy Lal wrote: On 04/04/2013 09:55, Daniel Pocock wrote: Hi all, I've had a few discussions with people about the git workflow for packaging. I've now made a diagram about this that may be useful for people, it is relevant to autotools projects in particular: http://danielpocock.com/autotools-project-distribution-and-packaging-on-debian Please let me know if anything could be clarified further Conondrum can be solved, as explained today by Russ Allbery : http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/journal/2013-04/001.html I actually think that the comments from Joey and Russ are both very valuable and it would be good to get everything together into a single document that explains both the dual-repository approach and the combined approach. My comments were not intended to (and do not prevent) what either of them is proposing. Certainly, it was meant to raise awareness of the fact that files from the upstream tarball may not be in upstream's tag: and I simply provide one way of dealing with it, a method that is used a lot and that was what I came across at the time I started contributing packages to Debian. I recall a discussion here[1 and followups] about a connected issue: another point of importing tarballs with pristine-tar was told to be the fact that .orig.tar.gz generated from git are not stable and thus there could be problems with DAK when re-uploading them. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2012/12/msg00044.html However I don't know if this remark is still valid with the current tools and workflows. Could anyone please clarify the situation? Thanks, Antonio -- Antonio Ospite http://ao2.it A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130404152102.3678926809fa4e2999cbd...@studenti.unina.it
Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
Daniel Pocock dan...@pocock.com.au writes: I actually think that the comments from Joey and Russ are both very valuable and it would be good to get everything together into a single document that explains both the dual-repository approach and the combined approach. Yeah, I agree. That's partly what I was trying to do with my notes, but they need more revision, and I wouldn't at all mind the content being copied somewhere that's more generally editable so that other workflows can be added. (I'll probably keep maintaining my page to document precisely what I personally do, but I can make those changes in more than one place.) My comments were not intended to (and do not prevent) what either of them is proposing. Certainly, it was meant to raise awareness of the fact that files from the upstream tarball may not be in upstream's tag: and I simply provide one way of dealing with it, a method that is used a lot and that was what I came across at the time I started contributing packages to Debian. Obviously the combined approach (Russ) is really only possible if upstream uses git, because of it's distributed nature. The dual-repository approach remains relevant if upstream is on CVS or SVN and the Debian packages are to be maintained with git. Indeed, that's part of why I haven't revised my notes yet. Both methods really need to be explained. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87wqsi2qiv@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
Andrey Rahmatullin w...@wrar.name writes: On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 11:13:05AM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote: The dual-repository approach remains relevant if upstream is on CVS or SVN and the Debian packages are to be maintained with git. You can use git-svn and similar tools to have the upstream VCS history in your Debian repo. You can, but I've not found it particularly useful. Mileage may vary, of course, but when upstream isn't using Git, the annoyance of dealing with the translation layer and the various weird conventions used in other VCSes has rarely seemeed worth it to me. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87sj362qhi@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
Antonio Ospite osp...@studenti.unina.it writes: I recall a discussion here[1 and followups] about a connected issue: another point of importing tarballs with pristine-tar was told to be the fact that .orig.tar.gz generated from git are not stable and thus there could be problems with DAK when re-uploading them. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2012/12/msg00044.html However I don't know if this remark is still valid with the current tools and workflows. Could anyone please clarify the situation? You need to keep the verbatim tarball that you generated for the first upload to generate subsequent uploads (until there's a new upstream release), because git archive won't reliably generate a byte-for-byte identical tarball as required by the Debian repository. It's easy to do this with pristine-tar: just check the first tarball you generate into pristine-tar and let it do its thing for subsequent uploads. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87obdu2qfh@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
Am Thu, 04 Apr 2013 09:45:44 -0700 schrieb Russ Allbery r...@debian.org: Daniel Pocock dan...@pocock.com.au writes: I actually think that the comments from Joey and Russ are both very valuable and it would be good to get everything together into a single document that explains both the dual-repository approach and the combined approach. Yeah, I agree. That's partly what I was trying to do with my notes, but they need more revision, and I wouldn't at all mind the content being copied somewhere that's more generally editable so that other workflows can be added. (I'll probably keep maintaining my page to document precisely what I personally do, but I can make those changes in more than one place.) I think it would be great if you would add it to http://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit My comments were not intended to (and do not prevent) what either of them is proposing. Certainly, it was meant to raise awareness of the fact that files from the upstream tarball may not be in upstream's tag: and I simply provide one way of dealing with it, a method that is used a lot and that was what I came across at the time I started contributing packages to Debian. Obviously the combined approach (Russ) is really only possible if upstream uses git, because of it's distributed nature. The dual-repository approach remains relevant if upstream is on CVS or SVN and the Debian packages are to be maintained with git. Indeed, that's part of why I haven't revised my notes yet. Both methods really need to be explained. Regards, Andreas signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
Andreas Rütten andreasruet...@gmx.de writes: schrieb Russ Allbery r...@debian.org: Yeah, I agree. That's partly what I was trying to do with my notes, but they need more revision, and I wouldn't at all mind the content being copied somewhere that's more generally editable so that other workflows can be added. (I'll probably keep maintaining my page to document precisely what I personally do, but I can make those changes in more than one place.) I think it would be great if you would add it to http://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit I strongly encourage anyone who feels like going to the effort to move anything and everything from my notes page into the wiki that you feel is appropriate there. I'm happy to give my blessing in whatever licensing one may want. Given that I don't currently even have time to update the pages with some of my current practices, I'm realistically just not going to get to this myself any time soon, and people shouldn't wait for me if they feel like it would be better in the wiki. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ppyavwem@windlord.stanford.edu
