notoriously confusing.
+So, in summary, if you are doing cross-archive work, or bug squashing,
+you can start using dgit right away and I hope it will make your life
+a lot easier.
+
+
==== NMU linear history on top of basic dgit history
Sadly, unless the maintainer uses dgit, the history you see in dgit
directly from dgit's objectives.
The most important requirement is that your git tree is identical to
-the unpacked source package. (Technically, in the case of a `3.0
-(quilt)' package, it is what is sometimes called a `patches-applied
-packaging branch without .pc directory'. Patches-applied means that the upstream
-source files in the main package tree correspond to the actual source
-code that will be used when the package is built, rather than to the
-upstream versions.)
-
-For all native packages, and for users of git-dpm and raw git, this is
+the unpacked source package.
+
+For all native and source format 1.0 packages (which will include
+people using raw git to manage their delta from upstream), this is
already the interchange format. These maintainers can start using
dgit right away for all their maintainer uploads. Please do!
-For those using git-buildpackage with `3.0 (quilt)', things are a bit
-more complicated. I'm told that gbp pq can be used to generate a
-patches-applied branch, and that some users prefer to use that as the
-interchange git branch, but I know this is far from universal. I'm
-talking to the git-buildpackage maintainers about gbp integration, so
-watch this space.
-
The other requirement of dgit is simply that the dgit branches are
fast-forwarding. So if your tools have made a rebasing branch, you
may need to make a fake merge (with git merge -s ours) before pushing.
haven't decided the exact shape yet.
+==== 3.0 quilt applied slide
+
+For `3.0 (quilt)' packages, things are more complicated. The purpose
+of dgit is to provide a git view which is identical to the source
+package, and can be worked on without knowledge of the maintainer's
+chosen source format, patch system or git workflow.
+
+This means that the dgit git tree for a `3.0 (quilt)' package is what
+is sometimes called a `patches-applied packaging branch without .pc
+directory'.
+
+This means that all the changes made in Debian are represented in the
+main source tree, as well as being contained within a patch in
+debian/patches.
+
+But: I think the most popular tool for working with `3.0 (quilt)' is
+git-buildpackage, and git-buildpackage likes to work with
+patches-unapplied tress. I've spoken to Guido Guenther (the
+git-buildpackage maintainer) about this. We had a really good
+conversation. We have a plan for interoperating, which involves dgit
+synthesising an extra git commit, to apply the patches, and then
+pushing that to the dgit git server. (The extra git commit wouldn't
+appear on your own branch; if it did, it would cause trouble.)
+
+=== xxxx status table
+
+There is another problem which affects both git-buildpackage and
+git-dpm: namely, .gitignore files. Neither git-buildpackage nor
+git-dpm represent the .gitignore, which typically occurs in the git
+tree, as a patch in debian/patches. Rather, these tools tell
+dpkg-source to ignore it when buildinng the source package. So the
+source package does not contain .gitignore, although the git tree
+does.
+
+I have spoken to Bernhard Link (the git-dpm maintainer) about this and
+he wasn't keen on having git-dpm treat .gitignore normally, and record
+.gitignores in a patch in the git-dpm branch. So unless we can
+persuade Bernhard to offer this, at least as an option, dgit is
+probably going to have to synthesise a commit to add them, in much the
+same way as it will add a commit to convert a git-buildpackage
+patches-unapplied branch to a directly-editable patches-applied one.
+
+
+
+xxx empty directories
+
+
+ I'm told that gbp pq can be used to generate a
+patches-applied branch, and that some users prefer to use that as the
+interchange git branch, but I know this is far from universal. I'm
+talking to the git-buildpackage maintainers about gbp integration, so
+watch this space.
+
+
+, and for users of git-dpm and
+
+(more or less)
+ xxx
+
+
+
==== data flow slide
There are a few other things I ought to cover, since they often come
The second thing that's less than ideal is that the dgit git history
does not generally include the package upload history.
git-import-dscs can produce a git branch representing the upload
+
+xxx patches-applied
+
history, but dgit doesn't run that itself. It would be difficult for
dgit to do so because deciding which set of versions to include is
nontrivial and of course it would involve an awful lot of downloading.
There are also some things that I need help with.
The documentation for how dgit works together with existing git
-management tools is rather sparse. Ideally each git workflow tool
-would explain how (or whether) it works with dgit. Tasks that should
-be covered include how to incorporate changes made in an NMU into the
-tool's favoured history format, and how to upgrade a package to a new
-upstream version.
+management tools is rather sparse.
+
+Ideally each git workflow tool would explain how (or whether) it works
+with dgit. Tasks that should be covered include how to incorporate
+changes made in an NMU into the tool's favoured history format, and
+how to upgrade a package to a new upstream version. I have spoken to
+the git-buildpackage and git-dpm maintainers about this. I'm
+optimistic particularly about git-buildpackage.
-The bug I mention there is my request against git-dpm for anew manpage
-covering these topics, since I think the moving parts for git-dpm to
-work with dgit are generally in place.
-And this leads on to the question of how to use git-buildpackage and
-dgit together. As I say, I'm talking to the gbp maintainers.
+There is a difficulty with empty directories in source packages. git
+refuses to handle empty directories - they tend to just vanish from
+commits and checkouts. But I'm told there are some source packages
+whose orig tarballs contain empty directories, and build systems
+depend on those empty directories.
+
+Currently if you dgit clone such a package, it won't build. I don't
+have a particularly good answer to this problem right now. It's no
+good to have dgit create these directories in the working tree, when
+it notices, because the git branches might be transported by plain git
+and used elsewhere.
+
+This can be worked around in the source package by either adding
+something to debian/rules to create these directories, or by adding
+some files to the directories to make them nonempty. But at the
+moment a maintainer is not required to do either of these things.
And then there are a couple of exciting possibilities for new uses:
Firstly, it would be very nice to have a way for a sponsee to provide
a dgitish git branch, which the sponsor could work with directly and
ultimately dgit push. I'm really need to talk about this with some
-people more familiar than me with the sponsorship queue infrastructure.
+people more familiar than me with the sponsorship queue
+infrastructure.
+
+
Secondly, dgit is not just for Debian. Other distros currently using
only source packages can use it too. Read-only support doesn't
dgit push. Patches very welcome!
+==== Thanks and more info slide
+
+Finally, there are some people I need to thank.
+
+At least half of the design of dgit is Joey Hess's, at the now-famous
+session in Vaumarcus.
+
+Debian System Administration, and particularly Peter Palfrader, have
+been absolutely brilliant. The level of service and competence has
+been outstanding. Ever time I noticed some aspect I had forgotten,
+and made a blatherous and ill-thought-out request, DSA would propose a
+much better alternative and implement their end of it it almost
+immediately.
+
+Also, I'd like to thank the ftpmasters for setting up the new
+ftpmaster data service. This has enabled me to extend dgit's
+useability to non-DDs.
+
+
So that's most of what I have prepared. There's, of course, a lot
more detailed information in the manpages.
~ijackson / talk-2015-debconf-dgit.git / blobdiff