Merging upstream git history into the debian packaging history?

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Felipe Sateler (2013-08-28 23:31:57)
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Felipe Sateler (2013-08-26 00:09:49)
> > > On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> 
> > > wrote:
> > > > Quoting Felipe Sateler (2013-08-24 18:59:03)
> 
> > > >> 2. Managing patches: it looks to me like the new workflow makes 
> > > >> it better to make changes directly to the sources (by 
> > > >> cherry-picking the appropriate commits/ merging the appropriate 
> > > >> debian-specific branches) and setting single-debian-patch in 
> > > >> local-options. Has anyone tried this?
> > > >
> > > > I still favor quilt patches - and don't follow how tying our git 
> > > > to upstream git renders that inferior: I consider it two 
> > > > separate Worlds - one using git and another using tarballs and 
> > > > patch files.
> > >
> > > I guess I see the main benefit of the new workflow precisely that 
> > > the separate worlds become one. Taking a patch from upstream is as 
> > > simple as a cherry-pick, forwarding a patch becomes a pull request 
> > > of a topic branch (or committing directly, if one is also part of 
> > > upstream). My take is that seeing the debian package as a slightly 
> > > edited branch of upstream makes a lot of sense.
> > >
> > > If you accept the above premise, then the single-debian-patch 
> > > option seems very useful (applied in local-options, so that NMUs 
> > > don't break).
> >
> > Ok.  We then do not value tarballs and patches the same.
> 
> I'm confused. Tarballs are preserved, and patches are still available, 
> although at the git repository. AFAICS, there is no data loss in the 
> mechanism I'm describing, am I wrong?

By your premise, "patches" can mean an interaction with a git 
repository.

I do not accept your premise, and my "patches" above implies flat files.

Does that help resolve your confusion?


I am a big fan of git.  But others are fan of other VCSes, and some 
still haven't seen (any of) the light(s).  So I see a relevancy of a 
"middle ground" using flat files and tarballs.

I have recently been made aware of gbp-pq, which sounds like the right 
tool to me: juggle patches as git branches, but flatten sensibly (not a 
single huge chunk!) when "exporting" to the files-and-tarballs World.  
Haven't explored it yet, though - perhaps that would be interesting to 
you too?


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20130829/b05c80e7/attachment.sig>