On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 11:44:38AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > > In #829444 it has been proposed the addition of a new "layout" option to > > gbp.conf, which would tell git-buildpackage which layout to follow, > > allowing for a graceful migration. > > > > I've been thinking about a different approach though. What about adding > > a warning to git-buildpackage when `debian-branch` and `upstream-branch` > > are not set in gbp.conf? Compared to the `layout` option, it would have > > the following benefits: > > ... > > How does it sound to you? Am I missing something? > > I prefer having no debian/gbp.conf at all in case the repository layout > would fit team policy. So the question is whether git-buildpackage can > cope with the old > > master + upstream + pristine-tar > as well as > debian/latest + upstream/latest + pristine-tar > > if no gbp.conf exists.
pristine-tar isn't the default either, so you need debian/gbp.conf if your team uses it. Unless I've missed some recent changes. -- WBR, wRAR
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
