Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #15568 > unrolled thread

"debian/main" support or ticket open?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  "debian/main" support or ticket open? c.buhtz@posteo.jp - 2024-03-15 09:20 +0100
    Re: "debian/main" support or ticket open? Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2024-03-15 10:20 +0100
      Re: "debian/main" support or ticket open? c.buhtz@posteo.jp - 2024-03-15 12:20 +0100
      Re: "debian/main" support or ticket open? Agathe Porte <gagath@debian.org> - 2024-03-18 10:50 +0100
        Re: "debian/main" support or ticket open? Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2024-03-18 11:30 +0100

#15568 — "debian/main" support or ticket open?

Hello,

my question is technically only. I don't want to troll or start a 
discussion. So please just say yes or no. ;)

To my knowledge in context of DPT and Salsa the branch name 
"debian/master" is used. When creating a new package are there any 
technical reasons not renaming that to "debian/main"?

It might be that the existing toolchain is not yet able to adapt to it. 
Do we have an open ticket somewhere that I can monitor?

Thanks
Christian Buhtz

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#15570

On Fri, 15 Mar 2024 at 08:10:55 +0000, c.buhtz@posteo.jp wrote:
> To my knowledge in context of DPT and Salsa the branch name "debian/master"
> is used. When creating a new package are there any technical reasons not
> renaming that to "debian/main"?

Naming is a social thing, not a technical thing, so there is unlikely to be
any technical reason for or against any naming that fits the syntax rules.
One important non-technical reason not to choose a different branch name
for new packages is to keep all the team-maintained packages consistent.

If there is going to be any change to this branch
name, then I think it should be to debian/latest as per
<https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/> (which is the name used
in various other teams like GNOME), not debian/main.

Other teams don't use debian/main because that name would be confusing:
in Debian, "main" normally refers to the archive area that is not contrib,
non-free or non-free-firmware (or in Ubuntu, the archive area that is
not universe etc.).

There are basically two models in DEP-14:

1. The latest development happens on debian/latest, and might be uploaded
   to either unstable or experimental, whichever is more appropriate. If
   experimental contains a version that is not ready for unstable,
   and a new upload to unstable is needed, then create a temporary
   debian/unstable or debian/trixie branch for it.

2. Uploads to unstable are done from debian/unstable. Uploads to
   experimental are done from debian/experimental, when needed. There is
   no debian/latest branch.

(1.) probably makes more sense for large teams like this one (and it's
what the GNOME team does). (2.) can be useful if your upstream has a
long-lived development branch, but that's not going to be the case for
most DPT packages.

When the GNOME team switched from debian/master to debian/latest, it
was a coordinated change applied to every package maintained by the team.

    smcv

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15579

Dear Simon,

thanks for drawing that big picture for me.

That info goes to my Zettelkasten.

Kind
Christian Buhtz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15611

Hi,

2024-03-15 10:16 CET, Simon McVittie:
> On Fri, 15 Mar 2024 at 08:10:55 +0000, c.buhtz@posteo.jp wrote:
> > To my knowledge in context of DPT and Salsa the branch name "debian/master"
> > is used. When creating a new package are there any technical reasons not
> > renaming that to "debian/main"?
>
> […]
>
> If there is going to be any change to this branch
> name, then I think it should be to debian/latest as per
> <https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/> (which is the name used
> in various other teams like GNOME), not debian/main.

I am guilty of having used `debian/latest` in multiple of my packages
inside the DPT by following DEP-14, because I prefered it to the DPT
branch name and I use DEP-14 in all my other packages.

> When the GNOME team switched from debian/master to debian/latest, it
> was a coordinated change applied to every package maintained by the team.

Do we know if this was automated by a tool/script, or if this was a
manual effort by multiple people? I would be happy to help update our
current DPT policy to use DEP-14 and perform the migration.

Best regards,

Agathe.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15612

On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 10:23:23 +0100, Agathe Porte wrote:
> 2024-03-15 10:16 CET, Simon McVittie:
> > When the GNOME team switched from debian/master to debian/latest, it
> > was a coordinated change applied to every package maintained by the team.
> 
> Do we know if this was automated by a tool/script, or if this was a
> manual effort by multiple people? I would be happy to help update our
> current DPT policy to use DEP-14 and perform the migration.

It was mostly done by Amin Bandali using a script:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-gtk-gnome/2023/08/msg00005.html

A few packages needed manual checking afterwards because they were not
consistent with the team's conventions (either already using debian/latest,
or still using master, or some other branch name):
https://lists.debian.org/debian-gtk-gnome/2023/09/msg00001.html

    smcv

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web