On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:17:15PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Robie Basak writes ("Re: "git ubuntu" wrappers [was: What to do with .git > directories in source package uploads?]"):
> Before we adopt this I think we should consult more widely, though. What do you propose? > And: even if the transformation is reversible, I think this should be > for archeaological purposes, not for operational ones. Ie you should > be able to inspect what's there, but any work based on the old branch > should probably either preserve it or discard it. I think we agree. I wouldn't expect a developer on an operational task to preserve it. But I think that any discard should be explicit. Tooling can help: by refusing to proceed by default, and requiring the developer to be explicit about whether to preserve or discard before continuing. > > OTOH, I wouldn't consider it to be a high priority to actually > > implement, and a default of failing if ..git exists would be perfectly > > acceptable for this extreme edge case. We could require the user to tell > > us exactly what is required (drop or unescape) when rebuilding the > > source package. > > > > Though then we'd probably need a "batch mode" that would probably > > default to unescape to avoid creating a minefield of edge cases for > > script writers. > > I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean something which contradicts > my previous paragraph. I'm partially contradicting myself by making an exception to the default. If the default is "fail", as I suggest, then batch processing archeology will become painful. A developer of such a script is unlikely to know about the edge case until a batch job fails, and the same principle applies to any other edge cases, of which there is a generally increasing set. So there should be a "try not to fail" mode which such an archeologist could enable that sets all relevant defaults differently. Robie  Though perhaps there's some value in preserving it in a low touch stability scenario, such as an unrelated update to a package in a stable release. But I don't think that case affects any design decision today.
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ vcs-pkg-discuss mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vcs-pkg-discuss