On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 22:08 -0500, David Nusinow wrote: > On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 09:06:19PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote: > > Is this worth the overhead of maintaining the upstream branches? I'm not > > sure. Currently, our deltas from the usptream releases aren't that big for > > anything but the server, so this really may not be worthwhile. I tend to > > just look through the whole log and debian/changelog myself, so I'm not > > sure I'd even use the upstream branch for this. What does everyone else > > think? Is this just another vendor branch that we really don't need? I'm > > struggling to come up with another usage case for it, which probably means > > that the idea is flawed.
I think the upstream-* branches would be useful for visualizing the relation between upstream and Debian history, e.g. using gitk, which is something SVN couldn't provide. > Ok... more brainstorming. The easiest method of dealing with moving changes > around in git is to pull or push them all. Cherry-picking is supported, but > it's not really the ideal model. So here's how you would create a change > destined for upstream and get it upstream using a pull/push-only method. > Say it's going to unstable and it's going to implement our Rock 'n Roll > feature. > > 1) Create local branches of debian-unstable and upstream-unstable. Call > them debian-rock and upstream-rock. No one will see these branches but > you in this scenario. > > 2) Make your changes of interest to the code in the upstream-rock branch. > Pull them in to debian-rock when you're ready to go. > > 3) Oops! We screwed up. You can either git-revert, git-reset, or just fix > your commit. > > 4) Re-checkout debian-rock, and merge upstream-rock again. > > 5) Build 'n test. Yay! Success! We're now ready to bring the rock. > > 6) Check out upstream-unstable. Pull the changes from upstream-rock. > > 7) Pull upstream-unstable in to debian-unstable. > > 8) Build, test, upload. Yay! It looks like our users are rocking out! > We're ready to let the rest of the X world experience the rock. > > 9) Pull upstream-unstable in to your local copy of upstream's HEAD. You'll > want to make sure it merges properly. Then push it to freedesktop.org. The procedure looks good to me, but I suspect the "Merge branch 'upstream-unstable'" commit may not be that useful in the upstream repo, so cherry-picking might be better than merging in the last step. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://tungstengraphics.com Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer