John Goerzen wrote: > On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 04:25:40PM -0600, Matt Zagrabelny wrote: >> I am using git with no debian/patches (quilt/dpatch) to manage the cdpr >> package. > > I am doing the same, for the very simple reason that every other > approach I've seen violates the KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) > principle.
> I am not a fan of git-rebase due in part to the difficulty of working > with others, but also in part due to the difficulty of tracking how > your differences from upstream change over time. All the > debian/patches systems I have seen suffer from both of these flaws. I don’t strongly disagree, but consider for a moment a method that tries to work around these flaws. It uses dpkg source format 3.0 (quilt). There are three branches: master, upstream, and upstream+patches. - master: patched source (including debian/ dir) - upstream: upstream source - upstream+patches: patched source (w/o debian/ dir) upstream+patches is rebuilt for each new upstream version by cherry-picking the relevant commits. I haven’t scripted this, but it would not be hard to. This method has a few advantages: - upstream can pull directly from you if they like all your patches - you can work on and test the patched source by building off of the upstream+patches branch - it is easy for others to find your patches, in a form that does not require any forward porting. - if you generate your debian/patches directory with git format-patch, dpkg will check that master and upstream+patches tell the same story. If you don’t mind the occasional duplicate commit, for new fixes you can work against upstream+patches and then merge it into master, though I don’t do this. FWIW I have been using this method and it’s not so bad. Regards, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
