On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 10:26:24PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hello, > > following the initial discussion we had in August > (https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/08/thrd2.html#00499), I have > written a first draft of the Debian Enhancement Proposal that I suggested. > It's now online at http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep14 and also attached > below so that you can easily reply and comment. > > I have left one question where I have had conflicting feedback > and I'm not sure what's best. Thus I will welcome a larger set of > opinions on this specific question (search for "QUESTION" in the > text).
[…] > Packaging branches and tags > =========================== > > Packaging branches should be named according to the codename of the > target distribution. In the case of Debian, that means for example > `debian/sid`, `debian/jessie`, `debian/experimental`, > `debian/wheezy`, `debian/wheezy-backports`, etc. We specifically avoid > "suite" names because those tend to evolve over time ("stable" becomes > "oldstable" and so on). > > The Git repository listed in debian/control's `Vcs-Git` field should > usually have its HEAD point to the branch corresponding to the > distribution where new upstream versions are usually sent. For Debian, > it will usually be `debian/sid` (or sometimes `debian/experimental`). I find this paragraph confusing. With gbp, this is where new Debian developments are made, and new upstream versions are sent to upstream/xxx. Or do you mean something else here? > QUESTION: some people have argued to use debian/master as the latest > packaging targets sometimes sid and sometimes experimental. Should we > standardize on this? Or should we explicitly allow this as an alternative? Interesting. Assuming a normal Debian package that has just a few backports (as opposed to every sid release being backported), and which imports only upstream tarballs/snapshots (not the whole history), I expect that a high proportion of the commits would happen on this branch. In which case, why not make it 'master', without debian/ ? Is it (only) in order to cleanly support multiple vendors? thanks, iustin
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature