[pkg-otr-team] gbp vs. 1.0 source format

[micah]

intrigeri <intrigeri at debian.org> writes:

> micah wrote (20 Feb 2014 15:05:25 GMT) :
>> I wanted to just register that I find source format 1.0 a bit strange of
>> a choice to me. To me this will be a little bit of a challenge, I would
>> have preferred 3 myself.
>
> What kind of 3.0 format would you prefer?
>
>  * 3.0 (quilt) + managing patches with quilt or gbp-pq or something in
>        debian/patches?

I guess I prefer the atomicity and "legibility" of separate patch
files. It just makes things a lot more obvious to me what is going on,
rather than burying these things deep in a subway map train wreck of a
git history. I like separation into files because it makes it really
simple to just go an look at a source package and find what is being
changed from the upstream source by just looking at files. With things
in git I need to push the Rubik's cube of a particular packaging team's
git workflow into my brain for an hour just to figure it out. Then if
you actually want to make a change, you have to actually solve that
Rubick's cube! 

Yes, there is a certain elegance to doing it all in git and using
branches and cool stuff like that, but when it requires that people draw
beautiful ascii git diagrams just to explain it, that indicates to me it
has gotten too complicated for words.

I've never heard of gbp-pq, so I can't say much there.

micah


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 930 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-otr-team/attachments/20140220/595bae5b/attachment.sig>