Robie forgot this bit (I think):
[1]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/vcs-pkg-discuss/2016-November/000909.html
Cheers,
mwh
On 16 November 2016 at 05:38, Robie Basak wrote:
> FTR, I answered most questions about "why not dgit?" in the thread I
> just moved to vcs-pkg-discuss only[1].
>
FTR, I answered most questions about "why not dgit?" in the thread I
just moved to vcs-pkg-discuss only[1].
For some specific questions here:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:31:31AM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> dgit can work on Ubuntu too, in a readonly mode. (It would be nice to
> make `dgit push' wo
On Wed, 09 Nov 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> > Ok, can you prepare a patch for DEP-14 then? I'll apply it as it looks like
> > a reasonable extension.
>
> Attached. FYI I intend to implement this in dgi
I forgot one:
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> A patches-unapplied tree:
>
> * produces confusing and sometimes misleading output from
>git grep, or (even if appropriate history is available)
>with git blame;
>
> * canno
Nish Aravamudan writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> On 09.11.2016 [23:38:30 +], Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Can you confirm what approach you have taken to the representation of
> > Debian source packges as git trees ? I would like to encourage you to
> >
On 09.11.2016 [23:38:30 +], Ian Jackson wrote:
> Nish Aravamudan writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> > Thank you! We will follow the same in the Ubuntu tooling used by the Server
> > Team.
>
> Great, thanks.
>
> Can I ask you a rather unrelate
Nish Aravamudan writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> Thank you! We will follow the same in the Ubuntu tooling used by the Server
> Team.
Great, thanks.
Can I ask you a rather unrelated question ? AIUI you are working on
importing Ubuntu's history into git. That'
On 09.11.2016 [21:27:14 +], Ian Jackson wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> > Ok, can you prepare a patch for DEP-14 then? I'll apply it as it looks like
> > a reasonable extension.
>
> Attached. FYI I intend to impleme
Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> Ok, can you prepare a patch for DEP-14 then? I'll apply it as it looks like
> a reasonable extension.
Attached. FYI I intend to implement this in dgit.
Thanks,
Ian.
>From 5c63400e9be8cb1532515764a1179730aed5
Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > The reverse rule is to convert _ and % and delete all #.
> >
> > Quoted for completeness.
>
> Ok, can you prepare a patch for DEP-14 then? I
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> > On Fri, 04 Nov 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > My proposal is reversible. It does not need to be extensible.
> >
> > So what abo
Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> On Fri, 04 Nov 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > My proposal is reversible. It does not need to be extensible.
>
> So what about "..."? Would it give ".#.#."?
Yes. I said (fixing my bug):
On Fri, 04 Nov 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> > We have defined simple "readable" mappings for the common cases that
> > we encounter frequently. Now if we need mappings for silly things
> > that w
Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> We have defined simple "readable" mappings for the common cases that
> we encounter frequently. Now if we need mappings for silly things
> that we don't encounter, I would suggest to use something easil
Hello,
On Thu, 03 Nov 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> % Reusing this is tempting because an epoch separator can never
> follow `.', so any `%' after any `.' would unambiguously mean
> `escape for dot rather than colon'. But in principle `.' can
> occur at the start of the version,
On 03.11.2016 [19:37:41 +], Ian Jackson wrote:
> Nish Aravamudan writes ("DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> > [ Raphael, apologies for sending twice, had a error in the headers in
> > the prior one ]
> >
> > Not sure exactly where to ask this better than deb
Nish Aravamudan writes ("DEP14 policy for two dots"):
> [ Raphael, apologies for sending twice, had a error in the headers in
> the prior one ]
>
> Not sure exactly where to ask this better than debian-devel, but I am
> working on an importer for the Ubuntu Server te
[ Raphael, apologies for sending twice, had a error in the headers in
the prior one ]
Not sure exactly where to ask this better than debian-devel, but I am
working on an importer for the Ubuntu Server team which parses published
versions of source packages in Debian and Ubuntu. I ran into an issue
18 matches
Mail list logo
