Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #9542

Re: PAPT git migration

Path	csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Brian May <brian@linuxpenguins.xyz>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.maint.python
Subject	Re: PAPT git migration
Date	Thu, 01 Jun 2017 02:00:02 +0200
Message-ID	<tNlGW-3j8-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<tNh0B-4U-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tNjvr-20L-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Original-To	debian-python@lists.debian.org
X-Mailbox-Line	From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Wed May 31 23:57:45 2017
Old-Return-Path	<brian@linuxpenguins.xyz>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status	No, score=-5.6 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, FOURLA=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
X-Policyd-Weight	using cached result; rate: -6.1
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	multipart/alternative; boundary="=_979885f81aa9de585d96011d27572a70"
X-Sender	brian@linuxpenguins.xyz
X-Mailing-List	<debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/14919
List-ID	<debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL	<https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive	https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/0f975da1a8470d5ecbc291f5b5721dfa@linuxpenguins.xyz
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	50
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Date	Thu, 01 Jun 2017 09:57:28 +1000
X-Original-Message-ID	<0f975da1a8470d5ecbc291f5b5721dfa@linuxpenguins.xyz>
X-Original-References	<20170531185815.GA1153@bach.rivera.co.za> <20170531173220.6df84975@subdivisions.wooz.org>
Xref	csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:9542

Show key headers only | View raw

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

On 2017-06-01 07:32, Barry Warsaw wrote:

> Let's assume not (which is fine with me; i.e. why adopt git-dpm for PAPT when
> we know we just want to get rid of it later?).  Then i tried to import a new
> upstream as described here https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackagingPQ

Another problem I have noticed with that document - but not had time to
come up with a solution yet. 

There are several places where "git push --all" (or variant) is
recommended. But this will also push the gbp pq branch(es), which should
never get pushed.

Thread

PAPT git migration Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2017-05-31 21:00 +0200
  Re: PAPT git migration "W. Martin Borgert" <debacle@debian.org> - 2017-05-31 23:00 +0200
    Re: PAPT git migration Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2017-06-01 00:30 +0200
  Re: PAPT git migration Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> - 2017-05-31 23:40 +0200
    Re: PAPT git migration Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2017-06-01 00:20 +0200
      Re: PAPT git migration Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2017-06-01 01:20 +0200
      Re: PAPT git migration Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2017-06-01 01:20 +0200
        Re: PAPT git migration Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2017-06-01 05:10 +0200
          Re: PAPT git migration Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2017-06-01 06:10 +0200
        Re: PAPT git migration Brian May <brian@linuxpenguins.xyz> - 2017-06-01 07:10 +0200
        Re: PAPT git migration Brian May <brian@linuxpenguins.xyz> - 2017-06-01 07:10 +0200
          Re: PAPT git migration Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2017-06-01 08:20 +0200
    Re: PAPT git migration Brian May <brian@linuxpenguins.xyz> - 2017-06-01 02:00 +0200
      Re: PAPT git migration Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> - 2017-06-05 11:00 +0200
        Re: PAPT git migration Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2017-06-05 11:20 +0200
  Re: PAPT git migration Jordan Justen <jljusten@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 03:00 +0200
  Re: PAPT git migration Daniel Stender <debian@danielstender.com> - 2017-08-01 00:40 +0200

csiph-web