-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello Sandro,
On 01.11.2011 15:52, Sandro Tosi wrote: > I'm following up the RFH (explicitly cc-ing Stefan ad Arno, just in > case) mail and what's written in [1]. I'm subscribed to debian-apache, but thanks for remembering me. I'm sorry I didn't submit any patches yet, by the way. I already worked on some stuff but it is not ready to be published yet. More on that below. > Anyhow, my suggestion is to try to bring the repo layout in a state > that's understandable by svn-buildpackage, and start using it to build > the package. We can keep maintaining only the debian/ dir in SVN, and > leverage the mergeWithUpstream svn-bp feature (see its manpage), but > at least we'll have a "standard" configuration, easier to work with. Fully acknowledged. I used to work with svn-buildpackage too, and it comes really handy. I'd be glad to have the repository in a shape which works together with svb-bp. We use layout 2 in glibc-bsd and I could configure svn-bp without much problems there, despite I am probably the only one using it there. However, merged repositories, i.e. those with the full upstream source are additionally easy to deal with. Especially with svn-bp you only need to checkout package/trunk (or trunk/package) respectively so the amount of wasted disk space is limited. So, why not switch to such a layout too? > What do you think about it? If you're worried about the work to > re-shape the repo, I volunteer to do that, but I don't know exactly > how to create a parallel svn repo (to show the end result) without > access to the current one. That said, if we're restructuring the repository anyway, why don't move to git? I was setting up git-svn for the Apache repository earlier which allows me to commit patches even though I have no write access to repository yet. That's only one of the advantages in using git (although I am no git zealot). For your question: You can refactor the repository locally (e.g. by creating a new local repository) and import it later to Alioth by using svnadmin. See [1] to get the idea. While we're talking about transitions: While getting some feeling for the Apache package, I noticed it is still a 1.0 package which makes use of dpatch. Would you mind switching to 3.0/quilt instead and dropping the dpatch depdendency? I noticed, there are two patches which aren't actually patches but scripts. I used some debian/rules trickery to replace them in a 3.0/quilt setup. I didn't publish my patch yet, but unless you think switching to 3.0/quilt would be a terrible idea I'd do soon. [1] http://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/CollabMaintImport - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOsBMEAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNtvuoQAJSBOEHh176uid425s1F7zd7 R7Nb2sBgvT9LDdn+DBT8MolXev76fsczg79Fm+sXSS9M+u00N4MbJ6AmhGr09mYQ ohjsb8snU9rt/bZbs/5CqunD5JOmEqsSYNd6oGfgmDFlglPDlQzZuT37c6M2p/s6 YuwlUueKbaAEiUNVm3mWFIMGjExDE4lGYmgG09nV2Jti4UCOL0S0VQovhcbvHlRa rIBxQ8uQ0miG1Scc8HrWE9RGWsLtt/+2GYe14TSA7/RFaxdf99tr6MBgXRLu5Uyn E/GicizGO4vIt1/pO4c9nrIy7Fp0ybmWUZO21j7Jbj/1Pz7xAaFioxez8pZ3xNpy FI3Mp5MVWTkhP5ylQb7et45+IbFgEEyOYkfvjm7M17h8YNx1uGCjs64sz/je402v rGqDUb/Z/6jSQMj/DgegTS5GMLm2smXhsW7fgdPW9ixzn8qDa5WE5AztRSh6HksM 2y0pIFeS5N9u99vZnT0KrxdGbE0Fy0zCdhJ18SPlhGkqsb1tikzgMRKOl3LMt+2P sXtMSIqYi8zVfPO8viSI0Ex20yGfHzD5nPzZxXFu5wAtRu2Vz550ccaq9Ev7Roo8 cAxZ1PEBAIYxUTRz9JuYn0bor8ZvYxpw92ulwd9GgsJ6tQlx/01Pz7Jnzt2Isoim VosbjRsoy0vUIRHk/pbr =XQfl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
