Hello Ian, Daniel,

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 12:21:56AM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Lack of a coherent patch stack is a problem if the individual patches
> are hard to extract from the history, which occurs when the patches
> need adjustment or conflict resolution to conform to new upstreams, or
> cannot be easily separated.
> 
> And I think the point about not merging upstream cuts both ways.
> Things that _are_ expected to go upstream may need to be distinguished
> from ones which don't.  The key question is whether the patches need
> to be maintained as a downstream delta for any time.
> 
> How about:
> 
>    This workflow is less suitable for some packages.  When the Debian
>    delta contains multiple pieces which interact, or which you aren't
>    going to be able to upstream soon, it might be preferable to
>    maintain the delta as a rebasing patch series.

+1 from me.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 03:52:09PM +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> I do have a few editorial changes to suggest:
> 
> 1. Change you aren't going to..." to passive voice ("aren't going to be
> upstreamed soon").

I prefer the active voice because this is a tutorial manpage (and the
rest of the manpage already uses the active voice).

> 2. Maybe state the rationales explicitly, at least in a half sentence?
> Warnings tend to have better retention when accompanied by rationales.
>
> So:
>
>    This workflow is less suitable for some packages.  When the Debian
>    delta contains multiple logical changes, it might be preferable to
>    maintain the delta as a rebasing patch series, in order to
>    facilitate reviewing/upstreaming/dropping individual changes.

One of the reasons for using the dgit-maint-merge workflow is to make it
simpler and easier to review, upstream and drop individual changes.
This bug is about noting the cases in which the workflow can make it
harder to do those things.  However, your text might suggest that
dgit-maint-merge(7) makes those things harder in general, and I'm very
keen to avoid that mistaken impression.  So I would prefer to stick with
Ian's text.

-- 
Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to