[pkg-bacula-devel] Upcoming push to new git repo

[Luca Capello]

Hi Jan!

On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:59:25 +0200, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 05:20:01PM +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:27:35 +0200, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
>> > Okay, still unsatisfied with the current state, I pushed the git repo up
>> > to alioth.
>> 
>> I am sorry, but you got the wrong repository.  pkg-bacula.git is the one
>> associated with the project, bacula.git is the one for the Debian
>> package, as I linked at:
>> 
>>   <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=612296#72>
>> 
>> That is why I was surprised not to get any commit notice...
>
> Well, now you did. :P
>
> As you can see, I rebased my changes before I pushed. There is now the
> master branch with only the adoption and a first changelog entry.

Mmm, I do not see any rebase, or at least I do not consider that a
"real" rebase: AFAIK you simply import only 4 changes, right?

> If you guys agree, I'd like to use git-dch to auto-create
> debian/changelog and it's setting should be 'id-length = 8' so we can
> look up commits more easily later. I.e. NO changelog changes in
> commits, but only before we upload (using git-dch -a for
> instance). Ok?

I actually do not like at all this workflow, because I do consider an
archive to be used without any Git-foo command, which means that
debian/changelog entries are not updated when the modification is done,
like any other ChangeLog.  What about commits which fix previous
commits?  They should not be part of debian/changelog, given that there
is no point in that, e.g.:

  <http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/foo2zjs?view=rev&revision=272>
  <http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/foo2zjs?view=rev&revision=273>

And I see this workflow as a point of failure for those who would like
(erroneously) to build a not-yet-released package and do not start with
git-dch: the so-generated debian/changelog will be the old one, thus
clashing with previous installations.

OTOH, as I wrote in a previous email, I do not care and you can simply
go on as you like.  I know that I have very strong opinions about how to
deal with debian/changelog:

  <http://bugs.debian.org/517973>

Finally, if you decide something (with consensus or not, remember that
Debian is a do-ocracy so people doing the work have the last word),
please document that in a sort of policy, to be eventually added to:

  <http://pkg-bacula.alioth.debian.org/>
  
> Please, everyone who wants to contribute, add youself as uploader and
> once that's done we can upload 5.0.3-1 if we want. Anything that
> *needs* to be included in a first upload?

I do not think we need everyone added as Uploaders: this should be done
on a work-basis, i.e. as soon as someone works on the package on a
regular basis (or she/he does an upload as a team member) she/he gets
added there.  ATM you are the only one working on it (I do not know
where José is with his work), so this should be reflected in the Debian
package.  But this is a minor point.

> About #606262: I think we should indeed fix that in the first upload.
> Then we create a squeeze branch at debian/5.0.2-3 and cherry-pick the
> fix. Does anyone volunteer or do you want me to do that? Talk to me,
> please!

I would say that we need to upload something ASAP, at least just for the
new maintainer and/or the new version.  If you would like to include a
fix for #606262 in the first upload, this should be OK, but given the
situation as it is now (squeeze is out, so any harm has already been
done), nothing will change if #606262 gets delayed.

> About my changes that were in the wrong repository: Since I already
> rebased stuff, I'm thinking I can maybe make two or even three
> dev-branches out of it to untangle different matters. We'll see.
> Otherwise I'll push that branch soon.

I would say you should have used your old repository (please note, it
was not "wrong" in a bad sense of term, it was OK as well, but not at
the right place if we need more than one repository, as we do for
bacula-doc...) as it was.  Nevertheless, you got the power, use it ;-)

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-bacula-devel/attachments/20110420/84e131a2/attachment-0001.pgp>