Hi, Am Mittwoch, den 25.05.2016, 09:34 +0200 schrieb Raphael Hertzog: > I fear that adding such expressivity is encouraging bad practice. While > I can understand that a single repository can be convenient and easier > to manage than proper "mr" usage, it also feels wrong on many levels: > - you don't know what branch is relevant for what package > - you are almost forced to not inject upstream sources to avoid excessive > growth of the single repository > - you have to namespace all your tags (and branches) > > In general, this choice goes against the various recommendations we > tried to define in DEP 14: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep14/
for some value of "we". The choice not to include the upstream sources was integral part of the design of this repository layout, and not a by-product. Namespaced tags are not necessarily a disadvantage. And that branching affects all packages together could also be seen as an advantage. I am not advocating this as a best practice in the general case, but when our case where the packaging of each individual package is trivial, and it is the orchestration of a large number of packages that is our main concern, the usually recommended workflows are not ideal and something like this works better. But git layout discussions tend to be a time sink, so I usually try to avoid them. I do not always succeed (as in this case). If this discussion derails into one about the repo layout itself, I kindly ask the repliers to change the subject to not mention the Vcs headers anymore. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim “nomeata” Breitner Debian Developer nome...@debian.org • https://people.debian.org/~nomeata XMPP: nome...@joachim-breitner.de • GPG-Key: 0xF0FBF51F https://www.joachim-breitner.de/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
