On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 03:08:42PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
> > Essentially, *everything* stays in git from upstream to distributed
> > releases to debian work and releases and also to downstreams. There's
> > no import of release tarballs because they are in git too, and
Hi Roger,
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 10:28:52PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
[..snip..]
> > Best practices for Git repository layout?
> > - git-buildpackage documentation is closest to that
>
> I would have to disagree here, the git-buildp
In data lunedì, 16. di agosto 2010 12:35:29, Ian Jackson ha scritto:
: > Adam Borowski writes ("Re: Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF"):
> > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:54:07PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > git://foo.bar.org/meow#debian
> >
> >
Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF"):
> That's not the problem being discussed here. The signature is fine. The
> problem is that while Joey may think that his repository is completely
> DFSG-free, it's the current job of ftp-master
Adam Borowski writes ("Re: Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF"):
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:54:07PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > git://foo.bar.org/meow#debian
>
> At least, neither git clone, merge nor fetch understand that syntax.
They could and should,
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 at 22:28:52 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > Best practices for Git repository layout?
> > - git-buildpackage documentation is closest to that
>
> I would have to disagree here, the git-buildpackage default layout is
> far too "Debian-centric". By naming the Debian and Upstream b
Roger Leigh writes:
> I can see that this could be a legitmate cause for concern, especially
> since the history is essentially immutable and if "tainted" will remain
> so unless it's deliberately excised and the history is altered.
> However, is this a problem in reality, or just theoretical?
I
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Since this is open for discussion, some comments about my take
on some of the discussed points:
> ftp-team is concerned about doing license checks across the entire git
> archive Colin points out that we're in the same situation with A
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:54:07PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 00:10 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 08:39:35AM +0200, Josef Spillner wrote:
> > > Am Donnerstag, 12. August 2010, 16:36:56 schrieb Ian Jackson:
> > > > This is easy: you just publish two
On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 00:10 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 08:39:35AM +0200, Josef Spillner wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 12. August 2010, 16:36:56 schrieb Ian Jackson:
> > > This is easy: you just publish two trees, rather than two branches in
> > > the same tree. (It's a shame
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 08:39:35AM +0200, Josef Spillner wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 12. August 2010, 16:36:56 schrieb Ian Jackson:
> > This is easy: you just publish two trees, rather than two branches in
> > the same tree. (It's a shame that there isn't a syntax for "git
> > clone" which checks out
Am Donnerstag, 12. August 2010, 16:36:56 schrieb Ian Jackson:
> This is easy: you just publish two trees, rather than two branches in
> the same tree. (It's a shame that there isn't a syntax for "git
> clone" which checks out a particular branch.)
The --branch option to git-clone is going to cele
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> Thanks for this very detailed notes! Can you please also upload them as
> attachment to the Penta event at
> http://penta.debconf.org/dc10_schedule/events/691.en.html ?
I've uploaded the notes as an attachment to the scheduled event inside
Penta. They don't current
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 at 20:27:24 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> One issue with 3.0 (quilt) is that when you check it out when it's
> maintained in a VCS, you have two choices: commit the .pc directory and
> files, or leave it out and then have to run some magic
[...]
> - Why don't you just check in wi
Giacomo A. Catenazzi writes ("Re: Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF"):
> I think there are three usual use of the sources:
> - developers/bug trackers/...
> - users: to check and to learn the sources
> - admins: who need to recompile/backport/.. sources
>
>
On 08/11/2010 06:47 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
Russ Allbery writes ("Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF"):
* Part of Joey's motivation is that if you look at GitHub, the
people using it a lot consider Git to be a source package format,
I've been doing that for some non-Debian work. It tu
Tollef Fog Heen writes:
> ]] Russ Allbery
> | After a discussion on IRC, I organized a BoF at DebConf10 to discuss new
> | source formats, specifically 3.0 (git). Below are the notes from that
> | discussion. I tried to take reasonably comprehensive notes, but I'm sure
> | that I missed things
Russ Allbery writes ("Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF"):
> * Part of Joey's motivation is that if you look at GitHub, the
> people using it a lot consider Git to be a source package format,
I've been doing that for some non-Debian work. It turns out to be
incredibly convenient, if you'
]] Russ Allbery
| After a discussion on IRC, I organized a BoF at DebConf10 to discuss new
| source formats, specifically 3.0 (git). Below are the notes from that
| discussion. I tried to take reasonably comprehensive notes, but I'm sure
| that I missed things. Other participants, please add a
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> After a discussion on IRC, I organized a BoF at DebConf10 to discuss new
> source formats, specifically 3.0 (git). Below are the notes from that
> discussion. I tried to take reasonably comprehensive notes, but I'm sure
> that I miss
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> source.debian.org is working on importing source packages into a Git
>> repository and storing the history as one revision per new source package
>> upload.
>
> That gives a
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> source.debian.org is working on importing source packages into a Git
> repository and storing the history as one revision per new source package
> upload.
That gives a 404. source.debian.net doesn't, but gives you a page with
as full
* Russ Allbery [100811 05:27]:
> If you're implementing 3.0 format, please don't hard-code the extensions that
> you "know" will be found in source packages, because as we add additional
> files listed in *.dsc, we may add other types of files.
Please be carefull with adding new extensions. Those
23 matches
Mail list logo
