Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!news.spin.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>
Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python
Subject: Re: Git migration schedule
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 02:30:01 +0200
Message-ID: <qicGt-db-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <qf9vr-5XN-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qhkZs-76Q-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <qhtgl-1Ro-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <qhAKS-4hU-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <qhOuu-7eA-27@gated-at.bofh.it> <qhONQ-7Be-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Old-Return-Path: <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d061aaa21be0521c94b8a
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 62
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:7605

--089e013d061aaa21be0521c94b8a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 at 09:55 Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> wrote:

> Probably so.  I have a checkout of python-django here and it seems to
> already
> be in git.  I haven't looked at the converted svn->git repo yet, but I'm
> wondering if what was converted was just old and out of date?  I'm pretty
> sure
> it was in git to manage the 1.8 transition.  The debian/sid branch has
> 1.7.9-1
> at its top while debian/experimental has UNRELEASED 1.8.3-2.
>
> That's probably necessary given the complexity of python-django, but since
> it
> deviates from GitPackaging, there should be a debian/README.source to
> explain
> to other team members how the repo is supposed to be used.
>

What branches do I need to put the debian/README.source file in? There are
six debian/* branches, don't think it is a good idea to try and maintain a
consistent debian/README.source in all branches.

Maybe debian/experimental would be sufficient? Or perhaps
debian/experimental + debian/sid?

In fact, putting in a branch seems wrong, it isn't specific to any one
branch, not sure where a better place would be though.

--089e013d061aaa21be0521c94b8a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 at 09:55 Barry Warsaw &lt;<a href=3D"m=
ailto:barry@debian.org">barry@debian.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br><div class=3D"gm=
ail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bor=
der-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Probably so.=C2=A0 I have a check=
out of python-django here and it seems to already<br>
be in git.=C2=A0 I haven&#39;t looked at the converted svn-&gt;git repo yet=
, but I&#39;m<br>
wondering if what was converted was just old and out of date?=C2=A0 I&#39;m=
 pretty sure<br>
it was in git to manage the 1.8 transition.=C2=A0 The debian/sid branch has=
 1.7.9-1<br>
at its top while debian/experimental has UNRELEASED 1.8.3-2.<br>
<br>
That&#39;s probably necessary given the complexity of python-django, but si=
nce it<br>
deviates from GitPackaging, there should be a debian/README.source to expla=
in<br>
to other team members how the repo is supposed to be used.<br></blockquote>=
<div><br></div><div>What branches do I need to put the debian/README.source=
 file in? There are six debian/* branches, don&#39;t think it is a good ide=
a to try and maintain a consistent debian/README.source in all branches.<br=
><br></div><div>Maybe debian/experimental would be sufficient? Or perhaps d=
ebian/experimental + debian/sid?<br><br></div><div>In fact, putting in a br=
anch seems wrong, it isn&#39;t specific to any one branch, not sure where a=
 better place would be though.<br> </div></div></div>

--089e013d061aaa21be0521c94b8a--