Andreas Tille writes ("Re: dgit advocacy again (Re: Survey results: git packaging practices / repository format)"): > On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 01:49:13PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Anyway, I'm very happy to talk to you (or anyone) about your own > > situation in detail IRL, and also open to hearing from anyone who has > > good ideas about addressing this adoption problem. > > I think I'm becoming a more and more clear image of the principle (not > of the actual usage). In my special case of really low popcon packages > mostly in sciences I'm not yet convinced that it is really relevant for > any downstreams - but well, may be you just pretend to be some > downstream and demonstrate that point of view.
Well, speaking only personally, I am eclectic. I have a tendency to become a user of all sorts of things, and certainly low popcon science packages etc. are the kind of thing I seem likely to want and sometimes want to fix... If you have seen a patch bug from me in the last half decade, I almost certainly made it starting with `dgit clone'. Of course I am a git expert by now so it is easy for me to cope with the disjoint histories which occur when the maintainer does not use `dgit push'. I know how to fetch additional history from elsewhere and how to related it to what I can see; I can easily transfer changes between branches in git, how to make ad-hoc buildable frankenmerges to test changes, and so on. Most of our users are not so lucky and I am trying to save them from learning more than they have to. Instead I think we maintainers should learn better tools (ie, git-based tools) to help support them properly. 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.