On 15/12/2012 21:27, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Jérémy Lal (2012-12-15 20:32:35)
>> i want to switch to a simpler and more efficient way
>> of using gbp branches for the packages i am maintaining :
>>
>> * always import on "upstream" branch
>> * work on latest versions is made on "master" br
On 16/12/2012 12:40, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I like that our current structures work well for unstable, testing,
> stable and oldstable - i.e. that it is only tricky to handle
> experimental which we make no promises for anyway.
>
> I suspect the better approach than force-merging with "--stra
Quoting Jérémy Lal (2012-12-15 20:32:35)
> i want to switch to a simpler and more efficient way
> of using gbp branches for the packages i am maintaining :
>
> * always import on "upstream" branch
> * work on latest versions is made on "master" branch
> * create branches of "master" when needed, b
Quoting Jérémy Lal (2012-12-16 00:13:31)
> On 15/12/2012 21:27, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Quoting Jérémy Lal (2012-12-15 20:32:35)
> >> i want to switch to a simpler and more efficient way
> >> of using gbp branches for the packages i am maintaining :
> >>
> >> * always import on "upstream" branc
Quoting Jérémy Lal (2012-12-16 12:52:17)
> On 16/12/2012 12:40, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > I like that our current structures work well for unstable, testing,
> > stable and oldstable - i.e. that it is only tricky to handle
> > experimental which we make no promises for anyway.
> >
> > I suspec
