Dear Ian,
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 05:07:57PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes ("Bug#852226: dgit: Want `dgit setup-maint-merge`"):
> > Package: dgit
> > Version: 3.6
> > Severity: wishlist
> >
> > A simple helper which would
>
> This is a fine idea, but FYI I don't intend to work on it.I was thinking of working on it myself, so that's fine! Regarding keeping in sync with dgit-maint-merge(7), I was thinking of having this be manual. I.e. there are two copies of the text in the dgit source tree, with prominent comments reminding anyone who changes one of them to change the other. This is because we otherwise have to introduce logic to substitute things into the manpage, which doesn't seem worth it for this one case. I would be happy to write that logic if you would prefer it to be that way, though -- please let me know. > > I think this should be a dgit subcommand because the -maint-merge > > workflow shouldn't be used without dgit (since there should be a > > canonical, non-rewinding git history that is updated with every > > upload). > > I agree that it should be in the dgit package, but my initial feeling > is that it shouldn't be a dgit subcommand. I don't want dgit proper > to contain nontrivial amounts of logic for specific workflows. > > Is it too confusing if > dgit foo-bar > and > dgit-foo-bar > are separate namespaces ? Yes. That's just going to cause frustration. > Or maybe it could be called git-setup-dgit-maint-merge. We already have several `dgit setup-foo` commands that mess around with the working tree, so it seemed appropriate to me to add this one as another setup- command. How would you feel about shipping it as a standalone script, but then having `dgit setup-maint-merge` call out to that script? -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
