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

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #16188 > unrolled thread

Re: Moving default branch after project creation

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

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Moving default branch after project creation Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> - 2024-08-07 22:40 +0200
    Re: Moving default branch after project creation Nicholas D Steeves <sten@debian.org> - 2024-08-08 01:00 +0200
    Re: Moving default branch after project creation Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de> - 2024-08-08 06:00 +0200
      Re: Moving default branch after project creation Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> - 2024-08-08 08:00 +0200
        Re: Moving default branch after project creation Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de> - 2024-08-08 09:00 +0200
          Re: Moving default branch after project creation Martin <debacle@debian.org> - 2024-08-08 09:50 +0200
            Re: Moving default branch after project creation Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de> - 2024-08-08 13:10 +0200
        Re: Moving default branch after project creation Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de> - 2024-08-12 08:20 +0200
          Re: Moving default branch after project creation Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com> - 2024-08-12 09:40 +0200

#16188 — Re: Moving default branch after project creation

On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 08:27:33PM +0300, Alexandru Mihail wrote:
> Hi, I've recently created
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/psrecord following
> previous ITP. The main branch was set to main and I'd like to move it
> to DEP compliant debian/master and delete the main branch. 

The candidate DEP-14 (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/)
currently reads:

  In Debian this means that uploads to unstable and experimental
  should be prepared either in the debian/latest branch or
  respectively in the debian/unstable and debian/experimental
  branches.

I'm not sure where you got debian/master from?

> (Maybe I screwed up by forgetting to uncheck the Readme.md first commit
> ?)
> I cannot delete the default branch as expected, but Salsa doesn't let
> me move it to debian/master either. I think I don't have the required
> permissions.
> remote: GitLab: The default branch of a project cannot be deleted.
> To salsa.debian.org:python-team/packages/psrecord.git
>  ! [remote rejected] main (pre-receive hook declined)
> error: failed to push some refs to 'salsa.debian.org:python-
> team/packages/psrecord.git'

Have you tried using the web interface to change the default?
(Settings > Repository) Create a new branch called debian/latest,
branched from master, then set the default branch to debian/latest
(and perhaps unprotect the master branch on the same page).

Best wishes,

   Julian

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#16189

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> writes:

> On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 08:27:33PM +0300, Alexandru Mihail wrote:
>> Hi, I've recently created
>> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/psrecord following
>> previous ITP. The main branch was set to main and I'd like to move it
>> to DEP compliant debian/master and delete the main branch. 
>
> The candidate DEP-14 (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/)
> currently reads:
>
>   In Debian this means that uploads to unstable and experimental
>   should be prepared either in the debian/latest branch or
>   respectively in the debian/unstable and debian/experimental
>   branches.
>
> I'm not sure where you got debian/master from?

FYI debian/master was DEP14:

  Changes
    2014-11-05: Initial draft by Raphaël Hertzog.
    2016-11-09: Extended version mangling to troublesome dots -- Ian Jackson.
    2020-11-29:
      * Replace <vendor>/master with <vendor>/latest
      * Recommend <vendor>/<suite> over <vendor>/<codename> for the devel branch
      * For native packages, require the default branch to be a devel branch
      * Minor typo fixes and cosmetic changes
      * Promote DEP to State: CANDIDATE
  Last edited Fri, 08 Mar 2024 12:33:22 +0000
  https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/

It's certain that there are many packages that follow DEP14 DRAFT rather
than CANDIDATE.  An alternative interpretation is that DEP14 strong
recommends (ie "should use", "should be", "we recommend")
<vendor>/latest rather than <vendor>/master.  Thus, <vendor>/master is
arguably still more DEP14 than not.  We've also seen the proliferation
of <vendor>/main development branches that fulfil all of the technical
objectives of DEP14, and I would consider them to also be DEP14.

As an aside, I'm curious what the undocumented 2024 edit was.

Best,
Nicholas

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

#16190

Am 07.08.24 um 22:33 schrieb Julian Gilbey:

> The candidate DEP-14 (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/)
> currently reads:
> 
>    In Debian this means that uploads to unstable and experimental
>    should be prepared either in the debian/latest branch or
>    respectively in the debian/unstable and debian/experimental
>    branches.
> 
> I'm not sure where you got debian/master from?

 From the Team Policy?

https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst#branch-names

-- 
Regards
Carsten

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

#16191

On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 05:50:38AM +0200, Carsten Schoenert wrote:
> Am 07.08.24 um 22:33 schrieb Julian Gilbey:
> 
> > The candidate DEP-14 (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/)
> > currently reads:
> > 
> >    In Debian this means that uploads to unstable and experimental
> >    should be prepared either in the debian/latest branch or
> >    respectively in the debian/unstable and debian/experimental
> >    branches.
> > 
> > I'm not sure where you got debian/master from?
> 
> From the Team Policy?
> 
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst#branch-names

The OP specifically said they got it from DEP-14.  Thanks also to
Nicholas for reminding me of the DEP-14 history!

Best wishes,

   Julian

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

#16192

Am 08.08.24 um 07:54 schrieb Julian Gilbey:
> The OP specifically said they got it from DEP-14.  Thanks also to
> Nicholas for reminding me of the DEP-14 history!

I don't see what makes the difference in the end?

There is a DPT policy that enforces to usage of the branch name 
debian/master for working on versions intended for unstable/sid.

Alexandru has permissions of the group Developer according to the 
members list overview. It might be that this membership is restricted to 
not being able to change the default branch. I haven't looked deeper 
into this.

The current structure of the tree is wrong to me or at least contains a 
useless branch.

> $ git logg
> * commit 4c0b559c9f60321be2fa412d73555ab38c517f16 (origin/pristine-tar)
>   Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
>   Date:   Wed Aug 7 19:11:03 2024 +0300
>   
>       pristine-tar data for psrecord_1.4.orig.tar.gz
>   
> * commit 1443d1a19aeed367f2f2131757f01e2b9eafcfb4 (tag: upstream/1.4, origin/upstream, origin/debian/master)
> | Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
> | Date:   Wed Aug 7 18:46:41 2024 +0300
> | 
> |     New upstream version 1.4
> | 
> * commit 4c41bddf5c750a5c694aaba42c8252b444856ff7 (HEAD -> main, origin/main, origin/HEAD)
>   Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
>   Date:   Wed Aug 7 15:21:38 2024 +0000
>   
>       Initial commit

There is the branch 'main' which contains just one file 'Readme.md'.

That one single commit is the parent for the two branches 'upstream' and 
'debian/master' which includes the upstream source I guess as there is 
also the tag upstream/1.4.

@Alexandru
For starting a packaging the git tree on Salsa is quite the last thing 
you need to deal with (except you need a repo quite early in case of 
needed and wanted collaboration with others).

I guess you did something like this at the start, if not you could do it 
this way.

$ # get the upstream tarball e.g. into ~/Downloads
$ mkdir python-psrecord
$ cd python-psrecord
$ $ git init
$ $ gbp import-orig --verbose --sign-tags --pristine-tar 
--upstream-branch=upstream --debian-branch=debian/master 
~/Downloads/psrecord-1.4.tar.gz
$ git branch -a
* debian/master
   pristine-tar
   upstream
$ git logg
* commit 6dc6446feb741badb628632a20a8fd64be3dd98e (HEAD -> 
debian/master, tag: upstream/1.4, upstream)
   Author: Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de>
   Date:   Thu Aug 8 08:17:32 2024 +0200

       New upstream version 1.4

* commit a309926d28d52527e88e3c96c7d2ec2c4b74347d (pristine-tar)
   Author: Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de>
   Date:   Thu Aug 8 08:17:32 2024 +0200

       pristine-tar data for psrecord_1.4.orig.tar.gz

Or you create the folder debian/ and here a file gbp.conf with this 
minimal content:

[DEFAULT]
pristine-tar = True
compression = gz
debian-branch = debian/master
upstream-branch = upstream

and use than for importing this command

$ gbp import-orig --verbose --sign-tags ~/Downloads/psrecord-1.4.tar.gz


If you are not that familiar with the GitLab/Salsa UI I strongly suggest 
you start the packaging in your own namespace and ask for reviewing, the 
git tree can later be easily moved into the DPT namespace!
In your name space you can do e.g. force pushing, branch and tag 
deleting that are not allowed normally if you use the official DPT 
namespace.

For now I suggest to delete all content in 
https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/psrecord so an empty 
repository is left.

Also add please some more information into the field of the project 
description e.g. what the upstream url of the project is.

If you not able to delete the now existing stuff please raise your 
hands. The repo could also moved into your namespace so you would have 
full access rights.

BTW: Within the ITP #1075810 you stated you want to maintain this 
package on your own, did you changed your minds?

And please use python-psrecord as source package name, psrecord is quite 
generic. A name python-psrecord would show it is a Python related package.

-- 
Regards
Carsten

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

#16193

On 2024-08-08 08:42, Carsten Schoenert wrote:
> $ gbp import-orig --verbose --sign-tags --pristine-tar
> --upstream-branch=upstream --debian-branch=debian/master
> ~/Downloads/psrecord-1.4.tar.gz

I suggest to use `upstream/latest` as upstream branch.
It spares you separating upstream/latest, upstream/master,
upstream/whatever later.

Cheers

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

#16194

Hi Martin,

Am 08.08.24 um 09:49 schrieb Martin:
> On 2024-08-08 08:42, Carsten Schoenert wrote:
>> $ gbp import-orig --verbose --sign-tags --pristine-tar
>> --upstream-branch=upstream --debian-branch=debian/master
>> ~/Downloads/psrecord-1.4.tar.gz
> 
> I suggest to use `upstream/latest` as upstream branch.
> It spares you separating upstream/latest, upstream/master,
> upstream/whatever later.

again, using plain 'upstream' is current DPT policy. :-)
And it's a good choice to me.

For me using 'upstream-1.x' or 'upstream/1.x' doesn't make much 
difference as branch name for keep track of e.g. the 1.x release.

But using 'upstream/latest' instead of just 'upstream' makes much of 
difference in case you need to deal 80%-95% with releases that are the 
current rolling release, it safes me much more often from a needed 
further completion of the branch name!

In other words, I would be against changing the current policy regarding 
the default upstream branch name.

-- 
Regards
Carsten

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

#16203

Am 10.08.24 um 00:01 schrieb Alexandru Mihail:
> Thanks everyone for chiming in !
> Debates around the branch name aside, I still can't find out how to
> access the Gitlab settings button to change the default to anything.
> It's a permissions thing I think. When I access a project under my
> personal namespace I see the settings button, all is well. Here, it's
> just missing. I was able to create the project, of course.

The structure of the tree hasn't changed since the last time i was 
looking into, did you read my previous email in detail?

> $ git logg
> * commit 4c0b559c9f60321be2fa412d73555ab38c517f16 (origin/pristine-tar)
>   Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
>   Date:   Wed Aug 7 19:11:03 2024 +0300
>   
>       pristine-tar data for psrecord_1.4.orig.tar.gz
>   
> * commit 1443d1a19aeed367f2f2131757f01e2b9eafcfb4 (tag: upstream/1.4, origin/upstream, origin/debian/master, upstream)
> | Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
> | Date:   Wed Aug 7 18:46:41 2024 +0300
> | 
> |     New upstream version 1.4
> | 
> * commit 4c41bddf5c750a5c694aaba42c8252b444856ff7 (HEAD -> main, origin/main, origin/HEAD)
>   Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
>   Date:   Wed Aug 7 15:21:38 2024 +0000
>   
>       Initial commit

The structure of the tree is simply wrong, given you are at the 
beginning I suggest to drop the current tree and restart from scratch 
within your namespace.
For me it makes no sense to work further on that base. It make things 
unnecessary harder.

Once it's working on your side it's easy to push then the tree to the 
repo on the DPT in Salsa again.

-- 
Regards
Carsten

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

#16204

> The structure of the tree is simply wrong, given you are at the beginning I suggest to drop the current tree and restart from scratch within your namespace.
> For me it makes no sense to work further on that base. It make things unnecessary harder.
> 
> Once it's working on your side it's easy to push then the tree to the repo on the DPT in Salsa again.
> 
I'll do that, thanks for the tips !
> --
> Regards
> Carsten
Cheers,
Alex

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web