control: tags -1 + pending On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Guido Günther <a...@sigxcpu.org> wrote: > Hi, > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 12:42:29PM +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 12:28 PM, Guido Günther <a...@sigxcpu.org> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 11:15:20AM +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote: >> >> Thanks for filing this. >> >> >> >> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Guido Günther <a...@sigxcpu.org> wrote: >> >> > Package: pk4 >> >> > Version: 2 >> >> > Severity: wishlist >> >> > >> >> > Hi, >> >> > it would be nice if pk4 would allow to use "gbp import-dsc" to unpack >> >> > the donwloaded sources in downloadDSCAndUnpack so users: >> >> > >> >> > - get a git archive right away >> >> > - can reuise their gbp configuration such as the configured builder, >> >> > - pristine-tar, ... right away >> >> >> >> I think we could introduce a hook which would replace the default >> >> behavior of dpkg-source -x, taking as arguments the path to the DSC >> >> and the destination directory. >> > >> > Sounds good. >> > >> >> >> >> I wonder whether the gbp hook should live in the git-buildpackage >> >> Debian package, though? That way, you could maintain it directly. If >> > >> > Sure. It would be nice if setup for users would the be as simple as >> > >> > ln -s /usr/share/doc/git-buildpackage/examples/pk4 ~/pk4/pk4.deb822.d/gbp >> >> Almost: >> >> mkdir -p ~/.config/pk4/hooks-enabled/unpack/ >> ln -s /usr/share/pk4/hooks-available/unpack/gbp \ >> ~/.config/pk4/hooks-enabled/unpack/ >> >> Regarding the symlink target, could we ship >> /usr/share/pk4/hooks-available/unpack/gbp in git-buildpackage? That >> way, all hooks would be in the same directory. This is similar to how >> shell tab completion files are shipped. > > Shipped now with the next gbp version: > > https://github.com/agx/git-buildpackage/blob/master/debian/pk4
Neat! I just committed https://github.com/Debian/pk4/commit/797dc0b887abbc482a7a095d687b710509a80816, upload to Debian follows in a second. One thing I noticed: the resulting branches are master, pk4 and upstream, which the currently checked out branch being master. Shouldn’t the only two branches be pk4 and upstream? > >> >> you think that’s not a good idea, could you suggest how the hook >> >> should be implemented? I’m envisioning something like this (untested): >> >> >> >> #!/bin/sh >> >> set -e >> >> mkdir -p "$2" >> >> cd "$2" >> >> git init >> >> gbp import-dsc "$1" >> > >> > #!/bin/sh >> > set -e >> > gbp import-dsc "$1" "$2" >> > >> > is enough (gbp will do the rest). That way we could also support >> > incremental imports (that is if the directory is already there we simply >> > import the new version on top of it so the use can diff between the old >> > an new version. >> >> Note that the pk4 output directories contain the version number, so I >> think incremental imports wouldn’t work well. >> >> > >> >> Side note: I think we should be fairly clear about the difference >> >> between a gbp-from-dsc repo and a gbp-from-gbp-clone repo, to not >> >> confuse our users. >> > >> > Yeah. I was thinking of putting a .git/gbp.conf into the repo that sets >> > >> > [DEFAULT] >> > upstream-branch = upstream >> > debian-branch = pk4 >> > >> > This would >> > >> > - make sure we override settings any branch settings in debian/gbp.conf >> > which we don't care about (since we're not cloning from Vcs-Git: >> > - Having the default branch named pk4 would make it obvious that this >> > is s.th. special. >> > >> > What do you think? In this case it would rather be more like your script >> > above: >> >> Sounds good to me. >> >> > >> > #!/bin/sh >> > set -e >> > >> > if [ ! -d $2 ]; then >> >> nit: use "$2" here as well >> >> > >> > git init "$2" >> > >> > cat <<EOF > "$2"/.git/gbp.conf >> >> I suggest to add as a comment what you wrote above for the benefit of >> readers of the hook :). >> >> > [DEFAULT] >> > upstream-branch = upstream >> > debian-branch = pk4 >> > EOF >> > fi >> > >> > cd "$2" >> > gbp import-dsc "$1" >> > >> > >> > Does this sound reasonable? I would then also provide a script that can >> > be used with pk4-replace. >> >> I don’t quite follow. What sort of script is required for that? > > Probably not even a script but a post-build hook that cats the name of > the generated changes file to /proc/self/fd/3. Ah, I see. > Cheers, > -- Guido -- Best regards, Michael
