On Sep 05, 2014, at 12:32 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>From my point of view, since you're anyway using features of
>git-buildpackage, it would be better to improve git-buildpackage...
>I like how git-dpm can keep patches applied on the packaging
>branch and porting the required shell to "gbp pq" s
On Sep 05, 2014, at 12:25 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>As others have mentionned, you should use "git rebase -i ". This is
>what you want to use on your patch-queue branch to modifiy individual
>commits, reorder them, or drop them.
Brilliant. For git-dpm then this would be:
$ git-dpm checkout-pa
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Even with those complaints, git-dpm feels like the better tool for team
> package management in git. The problems are minor and probably easily
> fixable.
>From my point of view, since you're anyway using features of
git-buildpackage, it would be better
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Sep 04, 2014, at 04:36 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> >Actually, nevermind. That's not the problem you were trying to solve,
> >although you could remove the patch as described and then apply the updated
> >patch at the end of the series.
>
> Yeah, t
> > The file is patched, but now I have an d/p/0005- file instead of a
> > modified
> > 0003- patch file. Sigh.
In this case you can use
git rebase -i master
edit the commit to merge 0003- and 0005-
Cheers
Frederic
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a s
I've done enough experimentation to feel confident in my opinion that the team
should adopt git-dpm as its git packaging regime.
Note that this is just my personal opinion. I look forward to feedback from
other team members and interested parties, either for or against my
recommendation. I've on
On Sep 04, 2014, at 04:36 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>Actually, nevermind. That's not the problem you were trying to solve,
>although you could remove the patch as described and then apply the updated
>patch at the end of the series.
Yeah, though sometimes for legitimate reasons you can't reorde
On Thursday, September 04, 2014 16:05:53 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Thursday, September 04, 2014 15:40:42 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > That gets you a source package, but the binary package FTBFS because one
> > additional test cannot be run during the build process (there's a DEP-8
> > test for full c
On Thursday, September 04, 2014 15:40:42 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> That gets you a source package, but the binary package FTBFS because one
> additional test cannot be run during the build process (there's a DEP-8 test
> for full coverage). Now though, you *must* commit or stash the d/changelog
> chan
tox has a new upstream so I decided to take the opportunity to A/B git-dpm and
gbp-pq on a more complicated, but probably common task, simply stated::
upgrade to the new upstream, refresh the patches, handling any conflicts, and
regenerate a source package for testing.
TL;DR: You can make things w
10 matches
Mail list logo
