Re: How mature is Pkg-format 3.0 (git), yet?
* Adam Borowski [120119 02:29]: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 03:47:11PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > There is a lot of different opinions about wether the format is sane at > > all. A problem with the basic idea/design of 3.0 (git) as opposed to the > > maturity of the implementation. > > It is strictly better than 3.0 (quilt). For every set of tree+patches > representable by quilt, you can produce a shallow git repository that > contains exactly the same bits of data and nothing more. This depends how you define "better". A source format is my eyes a way to communicate with our users and the overall comunity. A source format that only has the advantage of not caring if modifications to the upstream source are not easily reviewable[1] and makes it harder for the overall community to see our part[2] is not better. It is worse. To avoid me repeating too much, see also http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/09/msg00484.html Bernhard R. Link [1] If you have a set of disjoint modifications or of modifications that do not need some additional magic merging is trivially translateable to a quilt series. [2] I once for some package looked what changes other distributions had, never had I had that many different VCSes installed. Even if upstream uses some vcs, there surely will be some day a better one comes out or upstream changes for other reasons, so not even using the same as upstream helps to avoid that. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120119115652.ga28...@server.brlink.eu
Re: How mature is Pkg-format 3.0 (git), yet?
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 03:47:11PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > "Thijs Kinkhorst" writes: > > On Mon, January 16, 2012 23:26, Paul Wise wrote: > >>> I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until > >>> now. > >> > >> It is not currently accepted by the Debian archive: > >> http://bugs.debian.org/642801 > > > There is a lot of different opinions about wether the format is sane at > all. A problem with the basic idea/design of 3.0 (git) as opposed to the > maturity of the implementation. It is strictly better than 3.0 (quilt). For every set of tree+patches representable by quilt, you can produce a shallow git repository that contains exactly the same bits of data and nothing more. Only metadata would differ: * git doesn't store per-file mtime (but neither does quilt for files it patches), you can't store device nodes, etc * git would preserve references to commits that are not present in the source package; you can complete them from another place. These can be deleted as well, at the cost of changing the hash. A popular misconception is that git doesn't allow fine control of what objects you ship. There's simply no porcelain for that -- no one before had such a need. Git tries hard to err on the side of efficiency and safety rather than taking the minimal possible space. Yet if you want, you can prune a repository to exactly a given set of commits. The whole issue of being sure you don't unknowingly distribute potentially non-free data can be done by either repacking the received package after upload, or alternatively checking if every object is used by one of commits present in what was uploaded and rejecting if not. And if present commits have a reference to non-present commits that happen to include non-free or otherwise inappropriate data -- what's exactly the problem? -- 1KB // Yo momma uses IPv4! signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: How mature is Pkg-format 3.0 (git), yet?
"Thijs Kinkhorst" writes: > On Mon, January 16, 2012 23:26, Paul Wise wrote: >>> I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until >>> now. >> >> It is not currently accepted by the Debian archive: >> >> http://bugs.debian.org/642801 > > My experience until now is that it's mature in dpkg. It does the job just > like other source formats, for me. > > It's indeed not accepted in the Debian archive and also tools like Lintian > don't support it. So it depends on your goals whether you can call it > mature. It works very well for a local package I maintain. > > > Thijs There is a lot of different opinions about wether the format is sane at all. A problem with the basic idea/design of 3.0 (git) as opposed to the maturity of the implementation. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87y5t583v4.fsf@frosties.localnet
Re: How mature is Pkg-format 3.0 (git), yet?
On Mon, January 16, 2012 23:26, Paul Wise wrote: >> I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until >> now. > > It is not currently accepted by the Debian archive: > > http://bugs.debian.org/642801 My experience until now is that it's mature in dpkg. It does the job just like other source formats, for me. It's indeed not accepted in the Debian archive and also tools like Lintian don't support it. So it depends on your goals whether you can call it mature. It works very well for a local package I maintain. Thijs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8054b018669e4f81a61abc780bf05594.squir...@wm.kinkhorst.nl
Re: How mature is Pkg-format 3.0 (git), yet?
2012/1/17 Björn Esser: > I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until now. It is not currently accepted by the Debian archive: http://bugs.debian.org/642801 -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6ejwrhbrszhfshjjaqwolx8xxqgwtjodhy2-tyh6+r...@mail.gmail.com
How mature is Pkg-format 3.0 (git), yet?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi there! I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until now. BR, Björn. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iF4EAREIAAYFAk8Une4ACgkQ3u1SIc8s7PWuXgEAhXSGrJOhx93UjUU3OmQZ9toY mRxOJ+99KX9TJHDQGPUA/0eKvCuWDdVM3vSBC4u3Gn7qE4WZXAsS7mVh0sfb5WZW =v5pK -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f149def.7090...@googlemail.com
