[pkg-otr-team] gbp vs. 1.0 source format [Was: Debian OTR packaging team?]

[intrigeri]

intrigeri wrote (17 Feb 2014 22:46:10 GMT) :
> Holger Levsen wrote (10 Feb 2014 09:10:06 GMT) :

>> AIUI, gbp doesnt provide #2 very well?

> I have never used gbp with source format 1.0, so I have no idea how it
> handles patches against the upstream branch in this case.

> Anyone knows, or wants to give it a try?

I've just imported the pidgin-otr packaging history using
`git-import-dscs --debsnap', verified that the resulting tree matches
what's in the archive, switched to source format 1.0, modified a file
shipped by the upstream tarball, and successfully built with gbp.

Holger, did you have a specific problem in mind, or is my successful
test enough to clear the doubts you had?

Now going to see how feasible it is to a. ignore upstream-provided
tarballs for this package; b. rely on their Git tags only for
importing new versions; and c. commit our generated tarball to the
pristine-tar branch [1].

[1] http://honk.sigxcpu.org/projects/git-buildpackage/manual-html/gbp.import.html#GBP.IMPORT.UPSTREAM-GIT

Cheers,
-- 
  intrigeri
  | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
  | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc