Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> (it's not yet clear to me that Git can usefully represent changesets
>> via feature branches, but that's another argument that is already
>> ongoing elsewhere).
> People are arguing about that because bikeshedding and random discussio
Russ Allbery wrote:
> (it's not yet clear to me that Git can usefully represent changesets
> via feature branches, but that's another argument that is already
> ongoing elsewhere).
People are arguing about that because bikeshedding and random discussion
of lattices, is, apparently, fun.
apt-cach
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A VCS is a system for controlling (managing, distributing) versions of a
> repository.
>
> A Debian source package is a repository.
It's a changeset or a set of changesets. This is not a repository any
more than a collection of objects is a balanced re
This e-mail has been sent due to an upload to Ubuntu that contains Ubuntu
changes. It contains the difference between the new version and the
previous version of the same source package in Ubuntu.Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:41:04 +0100
Source: dpkg
Binary: dpkg dselect dpkg-dev
Architect
Anthony Towns wrote:
> Are you able to use the .git source package format right now? Yes, you grab
> Joey's sources, create a package with git, and you're done. You can't
> upload it to the archive, because it's not supported by dpkg in stable, but
> that's it.
It's also not supported by the many
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 08:26:23PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think it's a mistake to separate those -- our source package format is
> > a VCS system; if wig&pen happens to be a more suitable VCS, that's fine,
> > but it's not inherently superior or
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it's a mistake to separate those -- our source package format is
> a VCS system; if wig&pen happens to be a more suitable VCS, that's fine,
> but it's not inherently superior or inferior to any other VCS, just
> because it happens to be Debian-sp
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:48:19PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I believe the wig&pen format [1] solves most of those concerns. I believe
> that with some minor changes, it would satisfy the need of most packages
> (even those using complicated build system).
> But the complicated part comes wh
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 01:03:18PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > > > > The whole thing honestly doesn't do much for security anyway until
> > > > > the gpg
> > > > > support of dpkg-source is largely improved. For that I have no real
> > > > > concept
> > > > > yet, though.
> > > > Well, a
Hi Ciol!
[ This question is IMHO better suited for [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Am Sonntag, den 10.02.2008, 12:18 +0100 schrieb ciol:
> Hi, do you know it it exists something that allows to create .deb
> packages from ebuilds (or others files that looks like ebuilds)?
It's been some time since I last be
Hello,
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, ciol wrote:
> Did you received this email?
We did receive this mail, but there was not much point answering it... it
doesn't look like you made much efforts to find answers by yourself.
>> Hi, do you know it it exists something that allows to create .deb
>> packages
Hi,
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> For me this sentence is the essence of your mail: That you dislike
> Joey's idea since it includes the VCS in the source package itself and
> would prefer that we worked on creating a solution on top of wig&pen
> instead.
>
> Do I understand tha
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<...>
> However, stashing away uncommitted changes and not including them in the
> build violates least suprise. I'd except to see them either commited
> automatically, or the current error forcing me to resolve them before
> building. The advantage to auto-co
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:48:19PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
[...]
> But the complicated part comes when we try to think of interactions
> between VCS and source package format. I'd like to keep the (default)
> source package format mostly VCS agnostic but I'd like the source
> package to be ea
Did you received this email?
ciol wrote:
Hi, do you know it it exists something that allows to create .deb
packages from ebuilds (or others files that looks like ebuilds)?
Can dpkg manages other package formats than .deb?
Thx.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 09:07:38AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 06:46:55PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 04:06:12PM +1100, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 10:14:56PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > > > The whole thing hon
Hello,
I've been thinking a lot about dpkg-source and the source package format
following all the discussions (sourcev3, coping with patches sanely on
-devel, etc.).
We all know the limitations of the current source package format (1.0) but
I'll repeat them here anyway:
- it doesn't handle multip
17 matches
Mail list logo
