Re: Team maintained packages and git-dpm (was Re: Team upload for python-jedi)

2017-01-23 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Jan 23, 2017, at 02:41 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: >Which would be horrible. single-debian-patch means that to understand the >upstream modifications, access to the packaging VCS is required. I think >that would be a huge step backwards. Agreed. -Barry

Re: Team maintained packages and git-dpm (was Re: Team upload for python-jedi)

2017-01-22 Thread Nikolaus Rath
On Jan 23 2017, Brian May wrote: > I don't particular care what we move to, however it seems to me that we > really should be dropping git-dpm. I think git-dpm works very nice as long as the package doesn't get too complex. I think it would be overreaction to convert all

Re: Team maintained packages and git-dpm (was Re: Team upload for python-jedi)

2017-01-22 Thread Nikolaus Rath
On Jan 23 2017, Brian May wrote: [ Convert from git-dpm to gbp ] > Or would dgit be a better option? I confuse I don't really understand > dgit. dgit can be used with both git-dpm and gbp. Moving to dgit-only would mean to use a single-debian-patch. Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG

Re: Team maintained packages and git-dpm (was Re: Team upload for python-jedi)

2017-01-22 Thread Brian May
Barry Warsaw writes: > We've talked about eventually dropping git-dpm and just using gbp (with gbp-pq > for patch management). There are some packages (I won't mention names) that have already started doing this. Would it be worth creating a concrete proposal to phase out

Team maintained packages and git-dpm (was Re: Team upload for python-jedi)

2017-01-22 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Jan 22, 2017, at 03:00 PM, Dmitry Shachnev wrote: >On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:54:13AM +, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: >> "Drop DPMT from Uploaders (due to problems with multiple tarballs in >> git-dpm)" >> >> Then, the package is no longer team-maintained? > >Personally I think we could