[pkg-otr-team] Decision: 3.0 (quilt), apparently [Was: gbp vs. 1.0 source format]

[intrigeri]

Hi,

Antoine Beaupré wrote (02 Mar 2014 16:13:49 GMT) :
> On 2014-02-28 17:23:18, intrigeri wrote:
>> Well, the way I understood the opinions that were expressed in this
>> thread, I think we can have consensus with basically any of the three
>> proposals: that is, it seems that nobody will feel very uncomfortable
>> with any of these, and we could almost reach a consensus by picking
>> one at random at this point. OK, I'm using a quite feable meaning of
>> "consensus" here.
>>
>> Still, the one that seems to make more people really at ease is 3.0
>> (quilt), without single-debian-patch, so I hereby propose we just do
>> that, and perhaps revisit this topic later, if and when the stumbling
>> blocks we've identified with other workflows have good solutions.

> Agreed. We can start with that and hammer out some stuff on top if we
> need to.

OK, seems that we have reached consensus on this. Just renaming the
thread so that it is visible to anyone who might disagree, and not
have followed the thread entirely.

I'll wait a few more days, and then update the wiki page, and convert
libotr + pidgin-otr back to 3.0 (quilt).

> We can even develop techniques in parallel: if we use "3.0 (quilt)",
> that doesn't forbid us to have patches in the git repo somehow and
> experiment with ways of tracking that better!

Oh, I just remembered: IIRC David Bremner said (at the pkg-perl team
meeting at DebConf13) that he was going to investigate workflows
pkg-perl could use, with the patches applied in Git. Might be worth
asking him what his current conclusions are.

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