On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 09:11:05AM +1000, Craig Small wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:25:30PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> > makes a lot of sense. If your packaging workflow does not rely on
> > importing the contents of release tarballs, then for projects like
> > this you miss some content
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 09:11:05AM +1000, Craig Small wrote:
> That was the part I didn't understand. What are people doing to solve
> this generated files at release problem? I've solved this as upstream
> and a Debian developer by having tarballs.
Run the 'dist' stages as part of the 'build'
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:25:30PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> makes a lot of sense. If your packaging workflow does not rely on
> importing the contents of release tarballs, then for projects like
> this you miss some content unless you re-run the same release
> scripts post-facto.
That was the
On Sat, 2013-04-06 at 04:40:00 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 04/05/2013 06:57 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > A better way to write the above could be:
> >
> > gen-author-list:
> > git shortlog -nes | tr -s ' '| cut -f2-
> >
> > which in addition will fix up the authors using any .mailmap rule
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 10:21:58AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Andreas Tille
>
> > Hmmm, you just show some more code as in your blog but this is not
> > addressing the three flaws of the workflow I was mentioning in my
> > initial mail. I'm honestly wondering whether I'm missing som
On 04/05/2013 06:57 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-04-04 at 23:07:04 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> gen-author-list:
>> git log --format='%aN <%aE>' | awk '{arr[$$0]++} END{for (i in
>> arr){print arr[i], i;}}' | sort -rn | cut -d' ' -f2-
> A better way to write the above could be
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 09:38:36AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jean-Christophe Dubacq writes:
>
> > Yesterday, however, I just had the case of a project with no tarballs
> > (as the library I wanted to package is part of a larger project, it's
> > not released independently). I stumbled (too lon
On Thu, 2013-04-04 at 23:07:04 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> gen-author-list:
> git log --format='%aN <%aE>' | awk '{arr[$$0]++} END{for (i in
> arr){print arr[i], i;}}' | sort -rn | cut -d' ' -f2-
A better way to write the above could be:
gen-author-list:
git shortlog -nes | tr
]] Andreas Tille
> Hmmm, you just show some more code as in your blog but this is not
> addressing the three flaws of the workflow I was mentioning in my
> initial mail. I'm honestly wondering whether I'm missing something
> and these are non-issues.
They seem to just be deficiencies in the too
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 11:07:04PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Well, if you really want to generate these from Git, that's
> also possible (though the changelog might be quite big, so
> in some cases, I'm about to give up on that...):
>
> gen-upstream-changelog:
> git checkout master
>
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 08:21:44PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > otherwise the workflow becomes clumsier
> Just to be clear, did you read Russ' blog - are you referring to the merge
> trick he uses in his workflow for this purpose?
I've even owned the bug report that led to the Russ's approac
On 4 Apr 2013, at 20:16, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> otherwise the workflow becomes clumsier
Just to be clear, did you read Russ' blog - are you referring to the merge
trick he uses in his workflow for this purpose?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subje
Andrey Rahmatullin writes:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 12:07:42PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Since the Debian archive needs the tarballs *anyway*, the small amount
>> of additional work required to use the upstream release tarballs so
>> that we're obviously consistent seems worth it.
> FSVO sm
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 12:07:42PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Since the Debian archive needs the tarballs *anyway*, the small amount
> of additional work required to use the upstream release tarballs so that
> we're obviously consistent seems worth it.
FSVO small.
It's easy when the tarball is fi
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 04/05/2013 12:38 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Using git archive to generate a tarball from upstream is something that
>> I do in some cases as well. It all depends on upstream's release
>> process. I default to using released tarballs if they exist and are
>> useful, b
On 04/05/2013 12:38 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jean-Christophe Dubacq writes:
>
>> Yesterday, however, I just had the case of a project with no tarballs
>> (as the library I wanted to package is part of a larger project, it's
>> not released independently). I stumbled (too long) on having a good
>>
Jean-Christophe Dubacq writes:
> Yesterday, however, I just had the case of a project with no tarballs
> (as the library I wanted to package is part of a larger project, it's
> not released independently). I stumbled (too long) on having a good
> workflow for this (I ended up tagging myself the u
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:11:31PM +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> Yesterday, however, I just had the case of a project with no
> tarballs (as the library I wanted to package is part of a larger
> project, it's not released independently). I stumbled (too long) on
> having a good workflow fo
On 04/04/2013 10:25 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2013-04-04 16:00:34 +0200 (+0200), Andreas Tille wrote:
> [...]
>> I can not see how Joey[1] and Daniel[3] would solve these problem when
>> they are not interested in upstream tarball releases any more.
> It's worth pointing out, packagers should
On 2013-04-04 16:00:34 +0200 (+0200), Andreas Tille wrote:
[...]
> I can not see how Joey[1] and Daniel[3] would solve these problem when
> they are not interested in upstream tarball releases any more.
It's worth pointing out, packagers should not assume just because an
upstream uses a VCS with p
On 04/04/2013 16:00, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi,
as a non-regular planet reader I'd like to move the discussion here. I
have read the following blog entries
[1] http://joeyh.name/blog/entry/upstream_git_repositories/
[2] http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/journal/2013-04/001.html
[3] http://thomas
Hi,
as a non-regular planet reader I'd like to move the discussion here. I
have read the following blog entries
[1] http://joeyh.name/blog/entry/upstream_git_repositories/
[2] http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/journal/2013-04/001.html
[3] http://thomas.goirand.fr/blog/?p=94
I personally would like
22 matches
Mail list logo
