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

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #13566

Re: writing debian/gbp.conf considered harmful [was: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED]

Show key headers only | View raw

On 9/21/21 11:00 PM, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> However, having it duplicated in every package means we as a team work
> consistently regardless of people's global configuration, and that's one
> less detail people need to get just right to be able to contribute
> effectively.

No. It *ALREADY* works by default, no need to tweak anything on
debian/gbp.conf. Also, as I wrote already, using gbp buildpackage is
*NOT* the only one way of doing things. One can use sbuild without gbp.
What you're proposing is in fact the same as if you were proposing to
add defaults for some text editors in the packaging: that's irrelevant,
and hard to maintain consistently (like Sandro wrote).

> Also, one's global configuration might not apply to all the packages
> they contribute to

It is the case for me: I contribute to both the OpenStack team and the
Python team. Both teams have *very* different workflow (the Python team
is using pristine-tar, I don't like it and that's the main reason why
OpenStack is maintained outside of this team...).

In the OpenStack team, we used to maintain per-package debian/gbp.conf.
I am *very* happy we decided back in Debconf Montreal in 2017 to stop
doing that.

> it's easier for everyone if gbp just does the
> right thing based on per-package configuration than expecting people to
> remember to switch their defaults, or to pass options explicitly.

There's nothing to switch. One just needs to remember to explicitly
generate the tarball with "gbp export-orig", OR (preferred) directly
fetch the orig.tar.{gz,xz} from the Debian archive. If you forget, gbp
complains about it and stops building (that is, as long as you have the
option "no-create-orig = True" in your ~/.gbp.conf).

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org> - 2021-09-19 21:30 +0200
  Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de> - 2021-09-19 23:10 +0200
    Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2021-09-20 09:30 +0200
    Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org> - 2021-09-20 13:30 +0200
      Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2021-09-20 17:20 +0200
        Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2021-09-20 17:30 +0200
          Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2021-09-21 03:20 +0200
        Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2021-09-20 21:50 +0200
        Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org> - 2021-09-21 23:10 +0200
          Re: python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2021-09-22 00:40 +0200
          Re: writing debian/gbp.conf considered harmful [was:  python-django-js-asset_1.2.2-3_source.changes REJECTED] Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2021-09-22 09:30 +0200

csiph-web