Sam Hartman writes ("Bug#928554: dgit-nmu-simple should give an example of 
generating a patches-unapplied nmudiff"):
> The dgit-nmu-simple man page doesn't give any explicit examples of
> generating an nmudiff.

Thanks for bringing this up.  See also #850560 "Want `dgit nmudiff`".

> It's unclear that we actually have a standard on whether an nmudiff
> should be patches-applied or patches-unapplied.
> I find that I typically get patches-unapplied nmudiffs, that if you use
> a standard dpkg workflow without dgit they are easier, and having the
> patch duplicated is harder to review.

There are at least *three* possible formats:

 * git diff dgit/dgit/sid..dgit/sid  # after quilt fixup
     diff of whole package, patches applied
     upstream changes present as diff and as interdiff in debian/patches
     rune will work fine on non-quilt package

 * git-format-patch dgit/dgit/sid   # before quilt fixup [1]
   (or git diff dgit/dgit/sid..dgit/sid # before quilt fixup [1])
     diff of whole package, no patches generated
     upstream changes present as diff to upstream files, only
     diff contains no changes to debian/patches
     rune will work fine on non-quilt package
     if git-format-patch is used, maintainer can git-am in their
     gbp pq patch queue branch or equivalent.

 * git diff dgit/dgit/sid..dgit/sid :!/ :/debian # after quilt fixup
     diff of only packaging including any patches
     upstream changes present as interdiff in debian/patches, only
     rune will NOT work on non-quilt package
     rune will NOT work for new upstream version

[1] Or with appropriate restrictions to show only "real" changes.

Maybe we should do whatever debdiff does.

> I find it's unintuitive how exactly you generate a good
> patches-unapplied nmudiff, so I looked for guidance in the man page and
> didn't find any.

Mmm.  My 3rd rune above will do this, I think.  (Untested.)

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Reply via email to