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

Groups > linux.debian.devel > #117202

Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?)

From Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.devel
Subject Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?)
Date 2025-05-12 00:30 +0200
Message-ID <KLnlf-2sdc-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (5 earlier) <KKrhf-1Oho-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <KKtsJ-1PDL-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <KLlCN-2qim-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <KLmyR-2rET-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <KLmSd-2rNz-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Sun, May 11, 2025 at 10:50:21PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, May 11, 2025 at 02:35:14PM -0700, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> 
> > Once we have a decision, Guido is more likely
> > to support making that decision the default in git-buildpackage, and
> > the people who previously migrated from master to debian/master or
> > debian/sid (while the historic DEP-14 suggested them) are more likely
> > to change to the final branch name. With this everything would most
> > likely converge.
> 
> I think this significantly underestimates the annoyance involved in renaming
> existing long-lived branches (in that all clients have to re-clone or
> manually adjust), which is certainly why I generally avoid doing so unless I
> absolutely have to.
> 
I'm personally not a fan of branch renaming, so I can see the validity
of arguing for "no change". However, would it not be possible for those
who prefer to keep the old branch names (for the sake of compatibility
with existing tools/working copies/etc) to change the *default* (so that
new clones benefit from the new/preferred naming structure) and then
maintain the old default and the new default in sync by way of a
'git merge --ff-only' (which could be implemented in a hook, CI, or some
other automated means)?

This could even be something that gbp is aware of (maybe by a
configuration option which can be placed in gbp.conf, perhaps named
something like 'old-debian-branch') which it then warns the user about
when the two branch pointers aren't pointing at the same commit. Or
something like that.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

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

Thread

ITN procedure? Phil Wyett <philip.wyett@kathenas.org> - 2025-05-07 09:40 +0200
  Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2025-05-07 17:20 +0200
    Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-07 17:50 +0200
      Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-07 19:00 +0200
        Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-07 20:00 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-05-07 23:30 +0200
        Re: ITN procedure? Joost van Baal-Ilić <joostvb-debian@mdcc.cx> - 2025-05-08 06:10 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 08:20 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 08:50 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Phil Wyett <philip.wyett@kathenas.org> - 2025-05-08 09:30 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 09:10 +0200
            Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN procedure?) "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 10:00 +0200
              Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN  procedure?) Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 10:20 +0200
                Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN  procedure?) "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
                Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN procedure?) Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 21:40 +0200
      Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-07 21:20 +0200
        Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-07 22:30 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 00:40 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 02:00 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Tiago Bortoletto Vaz <tiago@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 04:40 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> - 2025-05-11 12:10 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:10 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 11:20 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:10 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 10:30 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:40 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Alexandre Detiste <alexandre.detiste@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-08 17:00 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 20:40 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 20:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Bill Allombert <ballombe@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 21:00 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 22:00 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-09 06:20 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-09 09:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-09 10:30 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-09 11:30 +0200
                RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-09 10:30 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-09 12:50 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-09 13:00 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-10 12:30 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-11 22:40 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-11 23:40 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 00:00 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 00:30 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 01:00 +0200
                git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-12 09:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference Richard Lewis <richard.lewis.debian@googlemail.com> - 2025-05-12 10:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-12 10:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-12 11:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-12 13:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-12 13:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-12 14:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-14 10:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-14 11:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> - 2025-05-14 11:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference Ananthu C V <weepingclown@disroot.org> - 2025-05-14 12:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> - 2025-05-14 12:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Peter B <peter@pblackman.plus.com> - 2025-05-14 12:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-14 13:50 +0200
                debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 14:30 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 21:00 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Julien Plissonneau Duquène <sre4ever@free.fr> - 2025-05-18 22:50 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific  git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-21 14:50 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Julien Plissonneau Duquène <sre4ever@free.fr> - 2025-05-26 13:20 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific  git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-26 13:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 11:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-14 12:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-14 11:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> - 2025-05-17 01:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 23:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-13 17:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-12 11:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Marc Haber <mh+debian-devel@zugschlus.de> - 2025-05-12 10:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 10:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 12:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 12:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues <josch@debian.org> - 2025-05-13 16:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-13 17:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-13 18:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 15:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-12 17:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 20:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 23:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Julien Plissonneau Duquène <sre4ever@free.fr> - 2025-05-16 16:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2025-05-18 16:20 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-11 23:50 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 10:10 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 09:50 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 10:30 +0200
              Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 11:30 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 14:30 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-08 15:40 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 18:00 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de> - 2025-05-08 18:50 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 21:10 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 21:20 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de> - 2025-05-09 19:20 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-12 15:50 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 10:10 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 11:00 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2025-05-10 12:30 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-12 17:00 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure - more words, fewer acronyms please? Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 19:20 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure - more words, fewer acronyms please? Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2025-05-13 15:50 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-08 13:40 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 13:50 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-08 14:00 +0200
      Re: ITN procedure? gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2025-05-07 22:50 +0200

csiph-web