Robie Basak writes ("Re: "git ubuntu" wrappers [was: What to do with .git
directories in source package uploads?]"):
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:17:15PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Robie Basak writes ("Re: "git ubuntu" wrappers [was: What to do
> > with .git directories in source package uploads?]"):
>
> > Before we adopt this I think we should consult more widely, though.
>
> What do you propose?
I'm not sure. The git list and/or debian-devel are obvious possible
places to ask for opinions, gotchas, other uses of the same directory
name, etc.
> I'm partially contradicting myself by making an exception to the
> default. If the default is "fail", as I suggest, then batch processing
> archeology will become painful. A developer of such a script is unlikely
> to know about the edge case until a batch job fails, and the same
> principle applies to any other edge cases, of which there is a generally
> increasing set. So there should be a "try not to fail" mode which such
> an archeologist could enable that sets all relevant defaults
> differently.
Again, I don't follow why `fail' occurs. You seem to be suggesting
that importing a .dsc containing a .git would generate ..git.
(I assume that Launchpad would be taught to reject new introductions
of \.+git other than in security support or ancient branches.)
If someone has such an importer-generated tree, containing ..git, they
can just use it and ignore the ..git. Surely that's why this is a
good choice of directory name.
If there are any non-historical packages containing .git directories,
we should file bugs and get them fixed.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
vcs-pkg-discuss mailing list
vcs-pkg-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vcs-pkg-discuss
