On 2024-06-19 09:57, xiao sheng wen(肖盛文) wrote: > Hi, > > 在 2024/6/18 18:07, Paride Legovini 写道: >> On 2024-06-14 13:02, xiao sheng wen(肖盛文) wrote: >>> 在 2024/6/14 16:25, Paride Legovini 写道: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I can review and sponsor imv 4.5.0-1, but I prefer to work on salsa >>>> rather than on mentors. Some comments on the changes you pushed to >>>> debian/latest: >>>> >>>> (1) Past upstream imports were done via `gbp import-ref`, i.e. by >>>> adding >>>> an upstream remote and importing the upstream tag. This has the >>>> advantage of having the full upstream commit history in the packaging >>>> repo, and this is why d/gbp.conf had `upstream-branch =`, which you >>>> dropped in d8e53ea1. >>>> >>>> Now the import of 4.5.0 is done and I'm not going to ask you to revert >>>> an re-import via import-ref, however please revert d8e53ea1 to allow >>>> the >>>> next imports to be done from a tag via import-ref. >>> I do a test on my local, I check out to old version debian/4.4.0-1 to >>> restart import, >>> even after drop `upstream-branch =` in d/gbp.conf, we still can use gbp >>> import-ref -u4.5.0 to get the full upstream commit history in the >>> debian/latest branch. I had push my test to: >>> [...] >> It is true that we can keep an upstream branch, but it is not useful (if >> you need the pristine upstream source tree, just `git checkout TAG`), >> and it's one more thing to maintain, as when importing like: >> >> git remote update upstreamremote >> gbp import-ref -uVERSION >> >> the upstream branch is not updated, and will eventually become stale. > The upstream branch is used on most git packaging workflow. We can view > upstream version update clear in upstream branch. gbp-import-orig and > routine-update also use upstream branch. The upstream branch will been > updated automated by gbp-import-orig or routine-update, it's not need to > do more thing to maintain. > > At present, when I run gbp import-ref, I'll get a warning info: > > gbp import-ref > gbp:warning: This script is experimental, it might change incompatibly > between versions. > > so gbp import-ref is not stable. > >> >> Moreover, having an empty upstream-branch gbp.conf setting signals that >> upstream sources should not be imported via gbp-import-orig, but in some >> other way (namely gbp-import-ref). Indeed you had to change that setting >> to import with gbp-import-orig. > Use an empty upstream-branch gbp.conf setting to stop other use > gbp-import-orig is not a better way. > > imv is a team maintain package, it should not restrict use gbp-import-orig, > even gbp-import-orig is used popularity. > >> If we agree on the above then please revert d8e53ea1, otherwise I'm >> happy discussing the points above, but please begin providing a >> meaningful use case for the upstream branch in the context of a "pure >> git" packaging workflow. > Use uscan and gbp-import-orig is often used in gbp packaging workflow. > routine-update also use the upstream branch, routine-update can package > new upstream version more easy,quick and automate. > It save many times on packaging routine. > > Keep upstream commit log on debian-branch is also useful, but for > most packaging situation, It's not need to investigate upstream commit. > > If only has debian directory change commit log in debian-branch, > the whole package step will look more clear, git log also shorter. > > The important is, use upstream branch can also allow use > > gbp import-ref andgbp import-orig in the meanwhile. > > There is not conflict. > > One time use gbp import-ref, the next time use gbp import-orig to import > new upstream version code is acceptable.
My point is: I would like for what you expressed in this last sentence not to happen. This said, given that the package is team maintained and "pure git" is clearly not a team policy, I'll sponsor your upload. -- Paride
