Hi Pierre-Elliott,
st 15. 8. 2018 v 12:50 odesílatel Pierre-Elliott Bécue
napsal:
> It's done, now. :)
>
thanks a lot.
--
Best regards
Ondřej Nový
Email: n...@ondrej.org
PGP: 3D98 3C52 EB85 980C 46A5 6090 3573 1255 9D1E 064B
Le mercredi 15 août 2018 à 08:43:28+0200, Ondrej Novy a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> st 15. 8. 2018 v 4:12 odesílatel Lars Kruse napsal:
>
> > What's up with the page? https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackagingPQ
>
> thankfully it was merged by Ondrej into
>
Hi,
st 15. 8. 2018 v 4:12 odesílatel Lars Kruse napsal:
> > What's up with the page? https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackagingPQ
>
> thankfully it was merged by Ondrej into
> https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging.
>
yes I merged it "back" to original page. If you know how to redirect
Hello,
Am Tue, 14 Aug 2018 22:01:50 -0300
schrieb eamanu15 :
> What's up with the page? https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackagingPQ
thankfully it was merged by Ondrej into
https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging.
See the details:
It appears to have been deleted.
Scott K
On August 15, 2018 1:01:50 AM UTC, eamanu15 wrote:
>Hi!
>
>What's up with the page? https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackagingPQ
>
>Regards!
>
>
>El dom., 12 de ago. de 2018 a la(s) 15:21, Dmitry Shachnev <
>mity...@debian.org> escribió:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
Hi!
What's up with the page? https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackagingPQ
Regards!
El dom., 12 de ago. de 2018 a la(s) 15:21, Dmitry Shachnev <
mity...@debian.org> escribió:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 10:20:53AM -0300, eamanu15 wrote:
> > Hello Everybody!
> >
> > Its a good idea use
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 10:20:53AM -0300, eamanu15 wrote:
> Hello Everybody!
>
> Its a good idea use gbp. Its more easy to use.
>
> Are there some step by step of the use?
There was a link in Scott’s mail:
https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackagingPQ
This page covers the most popular
Hello Everybody!
Its a good idea use gbp. Its more easy to use.
Are there some step by step of the use?
Regards!
El sáb., 11 de ago. de 2018 a la(s) 11:16, Scott Kitterman <
deb...@kitterman.com> escribió:
>
>
> On August 11, 2018 1:54:41 PM UTC, Ondrej Novy wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >pá 10. 8.
On August 11, 2018 1:54:41 PM UTC, Ondrej Novy wrote:
>Hi,
>
>pá 10. 8. 2018 v 22:29 odesílatel Scott Kitterman
>
>napsal:
>
>> Thanks. I'm glad more is going on than people arguing about what's
>wrong
>> with the tool we aren't going to use anymore.
>>
>
>cool :).
>
>What branch layout did
Hi,
pá 10. 8. 2018 v 22:29 odesílatel Scott Kitterman
napsal:
> Thanks. I'm glad more is going on than people arguing about what's wrong
> with the tool we aren't going to use anymore.
>
cool :).
What branch layout did you use?
>
I kept original branch names, renaming them is "phase 2".
--
On August 8, 2018 2:10:59 PM UTC, Ondrej Novy wrote:
>Hi,
>
>pá 3. 8. 2018 v 5:06 odesílatel Ondrej Novy napsal:
>
>> 1. convert git-dpm -> gbp
>>
>
>this is done.
Thanks. I'm glad more is going on than people arguing about what's wrong with
the tool we aren't going to use anymore.
What
Thomas Goirand writes:
> Let's say a patch has been applied upstream. In such case, I just do a
> few "quilt push" to check, then I see one is already applied (by running
> "patch --dry-run -P1 patch from the series file, and I'm done. In case of using git with the
> rebase thing, then I get
On Thu, 09 Aug 2018 at 10:16:31 +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Now, if all goes well, and if the above cases are fixed, them I'm fine
> using "gbp pq", but it's not any better than fixing by hand using quilt.
One advantage of both quilt and gbp-pq over git-dpm (and probably
git-debrebase) is that
Hi,
čt 9. 8. 2018 v 10:16 odesílatel Thomas Goirand napsal:
> Let's say a patch has been applied upstream. In such case, I just do a
> few "quilt push" to check, then I see one is already applied (by running
> "patch --dry-run -P1 patch from the series file, and I'm done. In case of using git
On 08/08/2018 09:19 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> On Aug 08 2018, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 08/08/2018 01:38 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>>> That doesn't make sense to me. git-dpm maintains (and rebases) Debian
>>> patches separately, so upgrading to a new upgrade release can
>>> principally not be
Ruben Undheim writes:
> There is no nightmare unless there are patch conflicts.
The one case where you could have a "nightmare" is:
1. Maintainer A updates package to latest upstream version.
2. Maintainer A uploads packages to Debian, and it is accepted.
3. Maintainer A forgets to push
Nikolaus Rath writes:
> The problems with git-dpm are the implementation and lack of
> maintenance, not the way the Debian changes are managed.
git-dpm requires that you always use its tools. If another maintainer
got confused and used another toolset to upgrade the upstream version,
things
On Aug 08 2018, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 08/08/2018 01:38 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>> That doesn't make sense to me. git-dpm maintains (and rebases) Debian
>> patches separately, so upgrading to a new upgrade release can
>> principally not be any harder than with gbp.
>
> It is a nightmare when
On 08/08/2018 03:55 PM, Ruben Undheim wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> The problem with git-debrebase will be the same as with git-dpm. As soon
>> as you try to upgrade / merge a new upstream release, you dive into a
>> rebase/conflict nightmare.
>
> So in other words, you prefer to solve the same conflicts
On 08/08/2018 01:38 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> That doesn't make sense to me. git-dpm maintains (and rebases) Debian
> patches separately, so upgrading to a new upgrade release can
> principally not be any harder than with gbp.
It is a nightmare when patches are conflicting.
> The problems with
Hi,
pá 3. 8. 2018 v 5:06 odesílatel Ondrej Novy napsal:
> 1. convert git-dpm -> gbp
>
this is done.
--
Best regards
Ondřej Nový
Email: n...@ondrej.org
PGP: 3D98 3C52 EB85 980C 46A5 6090 3573 1255 9D1E 064B
Hi,
> The problem with git-debrebase will be the same as with git-dpm. As soon
> as you try to upgrade / merge a new upstream release, you dive into a
> rebase/conflict nightmare.
So in other words, you prefer to solve the same conflicts manually with
quilt/quilt refresh or get similar but worse
On 08/04/2018 09:05 AM, Ruben Undheim wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> 2/ Ondrej Novy will do a mass-change from git-dpm to gbp on team packages.
>>> Related to this, Piotr will review and amend the team policy if necessary,
>>> as
>>> well as work on the pipeline to make sure the policy gets published from
Hi,
> > 2/ Ondrej Novy will do a mass-change from git-dpm to gbp on team packages.
> > Related to this, Piotr will review and amend the team policy if necessary,
> > as
> > well as work on the pipeline to make sure the policy gets published from
> > salsa.
Good initiative! The last upload of
> 1. convert git-dpm -> gbp
thanks for doing this!
> 2. change default branch to debian/master
please dont. a quick check to the perl team and it seems they dont
require it, so should we? if someone wants to follow DEP-14 then just
do so and document it on debian/README.source (and repoint
On 2018-08-03 10:08, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
> On 2018-08-03 08:04, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > There is no upstream/master, upstream/unstable, upstream/stretch or
> > similar in DEP-14, because:
>
> I did not suggest mingling upstream branches with Debian
> versions, which seems to be your
On 2018-08-03 08:04, Simon McVittie wrote:
> There is no upstream/master, upstream/unstable, upstream/stretch or
> similar in DEP-14, because:
I did not suggest mingling upstream branches with Debian
versions, which seems to be your impression. I just (maybe
wrongly) thought, that upstream/master
On Fri, 03 Aug 2018 at 08:21:28 +0200, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
> In fact, I thought that "upstream/master" were DEP-14-ish, but
> only "upstream/latest" (for the newest release) is.
Yes. The simple case for DEP-14 is that you are only following one
upstream branch, which is upstream/latest; the
On 2018-08-03 04:33, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On August 3, 2018 3:51:00 AM UTC, "W. Martin Borgert"
> wrote:
> >How about changing "upstream" to "upstream/latest" (for upstream
> >releases, typically for unstable) and "upstream/master" (for
> >following upstream master, typically for
On August 3, 2018 3:51:00 AM UTC, "W. Martin Borgert"
wrote:
>On 2018-08-03 11:06, Ondrej Novy wrote:
>> 2. change default branch to debian/master
>
>How about changing "upstream" to "upstream/latest" (for upstream
>releases, typically for unstable) and "upstream/master" (for
>following
On 2018-08-03 11:06, Ondrej Novy wrote:
> 2. change default branch to debian/master
How about changing "upstream" to "upstream/latest" (for upstream
releases, typically for unstable) and "upstream/master" (for
following upstream master, typically for experimental)?
Hi guys,
čt 2. 8. 2018 v 23:25 odesílatel Nicolas Dandrimont
napsal:
> 2/ Ondrej Novy will do a mass-change from git-dpm to gbp on team packages.
> Related to this, Piotr will review and amend the team policy if necessary,
> as
> well as work on the pipeline to make sure the policy gets
32 matches
Mail list logo
