On Jan 04 2017, Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> wrote: >>Curating a patch series is only 5% slower than commiting directly to >>the Git repository to me. I just have to remember to gbp pq import >>before making new changes, gbp pq export when I'm done, and once in a >>great while I have to do a small bit of rebasing to merge changes back >>into other patches. It's quite easy for someone who is very familiar >>with Git, using good tools. That 5% would be even less if I did it >>more often. >> >>I'm unconvinced that any of that work would really be avoided via other >>mechanisms. The most time-consuming part is rebasing and squashing >>related changes together into one coherent diff, but that's going to be >>just as hard with any of these tools since the hard work is semantic >>and >>requires thought, not just repository manipulation. > > And the thing that gets source delivered to users is the source > package, not a git repository. A proper set of patches is far more > understandable than an undifferentiated pile of diff.
The thing that's delivered to users in 99% of the cases is the binary package. In the (comparatively) rare cases where the user is retrieving the source, I am not convinced that most of these users truly prefer a Debian-specific source package with patches in debian/patches over a standard Git repository with patches as commits. > Sometimes I feel like people lose track of the fact that the VCS is a > means to an end and not the end target of the work we're doing. I think it's rather that people have different views of what the desired end is. Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«