I don't know. As I said in my mail I'm not even sure there's a problem here.
Let me give a bit of background here. Ian and I had what I thought was a really exciting call about git and source packages and stuff. It sounded like Ian hopes we'll some day get rid of patches-unapplied data models from our processes. To do that, there needs to be something to replace gbp pq in terms of simplicity and something that the average developer can understand. I said that I really didn't think git-dpm counted; I liked git-dpm but found gbp pq lots simpler. Ian nominated git-debrebase as a gbp pq replacement. I said I'd look. My conclusion is that it's certainly a git-dpm replacement, and I'll look at whether it is as easy to use in practice as gbp pq, but then I wrote that note saying that I think its docs are harder to approach. I think the one explicit concrete suggestion I'd make is to make it so a casual user can read git-debrebase (1) without git-debrebase(5) Or something so there's one man page that a user can start with that tells them enough to get going, and that they can approach git-debrebase without dgit. Rationale: 1) dgit is more complex and has more failure modes because as we all know, turning a git tree into a quilt dsc is really hard. 2) I think we're hoping eventually that pushing to salsa does the dgit-like-thing (possibly by calling dgit) and users don't need to do that themselves.
