Guido Günther <a...@sigxcpu.org> writes: Hello,
I don't really know if BTS is the good place to speak about this, but
lets go.
[...]
> It should be related so people tend to do things like:
>
> topic/sid/switch-to-dh
> topic/sid/add-gir
> sid
> bpo/etch
> bpo/lenny
> bpo/squeeze
>
> Most of the branch layouts code the distribution in one way or the
> other.
I agree, I just must face some will-change historical choices for now ;-)
>
>> The debian/changelog distribution field is UNRELEASED or unstable and
>> the user can change it by editing the file[1].
>
> Yes but we're also talking about autogenerating the changelog via
> git-dch right?
In my attempt to an automated build system based on git, the
debian/changelog is autogenerated on a temporary "build" branch.
The packagers do not have do worry about debian/changelog conflicts when
merging between packaging branches.
>> The branch name can be whatever use want, like ebo for etch-backports
>> for example.
>
> Yes, that's fine as long as he is able to specify this mapping.
I thought about forgetting the branch name in that regards and use one
debian/gbp.conf per packaging branch.
So, if I want to make some tests, I can create new temporary branches
and avoid setting many command line options.
>> I think having on base-DIST-ARCH per distribution I maintain is more
>> useful than per branch name.
>
> What do we do in the UNRELEASED case? Fall back to the last changelog
> line that sets a distribution?
Seems reasonable to me.
I finally test sbuild in replacement of cowbuilder and figure out that
there is several concepts here:
- distributions used for "debian/changelog"
- distributions used to build the package
I can have several "debian/changelog" distributions sharing the same
"build" distribution.
I mean of making a snapshot of the same schroot.
In that regards, schroot seems much better than cowdancer, due to its
"aliases" option. I can share the same logical volume for several
"build" distributions.
I'll look at managing sbuild with git-buildpackage.
I wonder if I extend git-pbuilder or making something different.
>> I can have many branches for on distribution (aka topic branches), their
>> debian/changelog seems more relevant to me than the branch name.
>
> Yes, that's fine as long as he is able to specify this mapping.
>
> We have several places where we're repeating the same information:
>
> git-buildpackage --git-dist=sid --git-debian-branch=sid
> git-dch --debian-branch=sid --dist=sid
>
> So it'd be nicer to have something like:
>
> git-buildpackage --git-guess-by-branch
> git-dch --guess-by-branch
>
> do the right thing. That said we can have both. I certainly wouldn't
> object to a patch that sets the distribution based on the changelog in
> case of --git-dist=changelog.
I spoke about using "debian/changelog" in git-pbuilder because it's a
shell script and I assumed that the "debian/changelog" was the canonical
place which store that information /outside/ git-buildpackage.
I don't think it's useful to use "debian/changelog" /in/
git-buildpackage[1], using explicit options[2] make it clear of what
happens and when.
Maybe it's better to be forced to edit a file or use command line
options for that than using some will-break-something-one-day magic.
Today I'm looking at using git-buildpackage to build the upstream
tarball, the debian tarball and the dsc and push that to a wanna-build
system[3].
Regards.
Footnotes:
[1] I make a difference between the python code and shell scripts, the
later could be user specific.
[2] --dist does not exist yet for git-dch by the way ;-)
[3] I'm trying to understand it and install one ;-)
--
Daniel Dehennin
Récupérer ma clef GPG:
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x6A2540D1
pgptHR0rPPpbx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
