Re: PAPT git migration

2017-07-31 Thread Daniel Stender
On 31.05.2017 20:58, Stefano Rivera wrote: > It's been a while, but I found some time and energy at PyCon, to work > our SVN->Git migration. > > I started with our DPMT migration script, pulled out the git-dpm bits, > and fixed the obvious issues I saw. > > Here's what the migration currently

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-07-09 Thread Jordan Justen
On 2017-05-31 11:58:15, Stefano Rivera wrote: > It's been a while, but I found some time and energy at PyCon, to work > our SVN->Git migration. > > I started with our DPMT migration script, pulled out the git-dpm bits, > and fixed the obvious issues I saw. > > Here's what the migration currently

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-06-05 Thread Mattia Rizzolo
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 04:23:20PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 01 Jun 2017, Brian May wrote: > > On 2017-06-01 07:32, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > > > > Let's assume not (which is fine with me; i.e. why adopt git-dpm for PAPT > > > when > > > we know we just want to get rid of it

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-06-01 Thread Simon McVittie
On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 at 15:06:07 +1000, Brian May wrote: > So to me it looks like the required changes are: > > * Rename Author field to From. Ensure it is first field. It doesn't *have* to be the first, but if it isn't, gbp pq export will re-order it. > * Add Date field. Set to what? The date

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Brian May
On 2017-06-01 09:16, Simon McVittie wrote: > but this style (which is a DEP3 invention, and not used outside Debian and its > derivatives) is not: > > Author: ... > Description: First line of description > More description > more description > yet more description > Bug-Debian: ... Might be

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Brian May
On 2017-06-01 09:16, Simon McVittie wrote: > From: ... > Date: ... > Subject: First line of description > > More description > more description > yet more description > > Bug-Debian: ... > Applied-upstream: ... > More-DEP3-fields-in-pseudo-header: ... > --- > optional diffstat here > > diff

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Scott (2017.06.01_05:01:00_+0200) > As long as we have one team solution for this that is documented I > don't care what it is as long as it works. I don't think we should > have two approaches. Let's pick one and use it. Team members should > not be surprised when they look at a team git

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Scott Kitterman
On May 31, 2017 7:16:39 PM EDT, Simon McVittie wrote: >On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 at 00:16:45 +0200, Stefano Rivera wrote: >> Hi Barry (2017.05.31_23:32:20_+0200) >> > $ gbp pq export >> > - This doesn't work until you at least do a first pq import, but >now I see the >> >

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Brian May
On 2017-06-01 07:32, Barry Warsaw wrote: > Let's assume not (which is fine with me; i.e. why adopt git-dpm for PAPT when > we know we just want to get rid of it later?). Then i tried to import a new > upstream as described here https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackagingPQ Another problem I

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Simon McVittie
On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 at 00:16:45 +0200, Stefano Rivera wrote: > Hi Barry (2017.05.31_23:32:20_+0200) > > $ gbp pq export > > - This doesn't work until you at least do a first pq import, but now I see > > the > > d/p/changlog-docs patch gets changed in ways that lose information: > > Sounds like

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Mattia Rizzolo
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 12:16:45AM +0200, Stefano Rivera wrote: > > $ gbp pq export > > - This doesn't work until you at least do a first pq import, but now I see > > the > > d/p/changlog-docs patch gets changed in ways that lose information: > > Sounds like a limitation of pq import. I'm

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi W. (2017.05.31_22:54:10_+0200) > > * trac-batchmodify: OK > > * trac-git: missing a tag [DONE] > > Those two are only in oldstable. > Not sure whether it is worth to migrate them at all. Yeah, let's ditch them entirely. I picked up on some deleted packages during my review, when the history

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Barry (2017.05.31_23:32:20_+0200) > I did a spot check on twine. I don't see a debian/.git-dpm file on master so > git-dpm won't work. Is it supposed to? > Let's assume not (which is fine with me; i.e. why adopt git-dpm for PAPT when > we know we just want to get rid of it later?). Yep, no

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread Barry Warsaw
On May 31, 2017, at 08:58 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote: >It's been a while, but I found some time and energy at PyCon, to work >our SVN->Git migration. Thanks for all your great work on this Stefano! >Here's what the migration currently looks like [0]. >[0]:

Re: PAPT git migration

2017-05-31 Thread W. Martin Borgert
Many thanks, Stefano, for your work on this! On 2017-05-31 20:58, Stefano Rivera wrote: > * trac-batchmodify: OK > * trac-git: missing a tag [DONE] Those two are only in oldstable. Not sure whether it is worth to migrate them at all. > * trac-privateticketsplugin: missing some tags [DONE] This

Re: PAPT Git

2016-08-10 Thread Piotr Ożarowski
[Sandro Tosi, 2016-08-10] > should we try and use plain git-buildpackage instead of git-dpm? the plan is to test something else (git-pq), yes (and maybe even later replace git-dpm with it in DPMT if it proves to be better) -- Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Re: PAPT Git (was: pypi2deb 1.20160809 and --profile dpmt)

2016-08-10 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:50 PM, W. Martin Borgert wrote: > On 2016-08-09 23:28, Daniel Stender wrote: >> On this occasion ... let it be me to start the discussion: let's get into Git >> also for Python Apps soon. > > A common VCS for both DPMT and PAPT would be nice, indeed.