From 0bb405685234a99c9f78e19b3370da4816923a5a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ian Jackson Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 01:43:57 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] git-debrebase: NOTES updates Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson --- NOTES.git-debrebase | 40 +++++++++++++--------------------------- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) diff --git a/NOTES.git-debrebase b/NOTES.git-debrebase index b7552b70..f32cf87e 100644 --- a/NOTES.git-debrebase +++ b/NOTES.git-debrebase @@ -1,14 +1,13 @@ TODO - reference docs - git-debrebase(1) command line tutorial dgit-maint-debrebase(7) someone should set branch..mergeOptions to include --ff-only ? - clean up remains of README - arrange for dgit to automatically stitch on push - + dgit push usually needs to (re)make a pseudomerge. The "first" + git-debrebase stripped out the previous pseudomerge and could + remembeed the old HEAD. But the user has to manually stitch it. + To fix this, do we need a new push hook for dgit ? @@ -31,11 +30,6 @@ workflow that remade pm will incorporate it - -# undocumented usages: -# -# git-debrebase [] downstream-rebase-launder-v0 # experimental - # problems / outstanding questions: # # * dgit push with a `3.0 (quilt)' package means doing quilt @@ -43,40 +37,32 @@ workflow # series, one at a time, with dpkg-source --commit. This is # terribly terribly slow. (Maybe this should be fixed in dgit.) # -# * dgit push usually needs to (re)make a pseudomerge. The "first" -# git-debrebase stripped out the previous pseudomerge and could -# have remembeed the HEAD. But it's not quite clear what history -# ought to be preserved and what should be discarded. For now -# the user will have to tell dgit --overwrite. -# -# To fix this, do we need a new push hook for dgit ? -# # * Workflow is currently clumsy. Lots of spurious runes to type. # There's not even a guide. # # * new-upstream-v0 has a terrible UI for multiple upstream pieces. # You end up with giant runic command lines. Does this matter / +# One consequence of the lack of richness it can need -f in +# fairly sensible situations. # -# One consequence of the lack of richness it can need --force in -# fairly sensible situations and there is no way to tell it what -# you are really trying to do, other than just --force. There -# should be an interface with some default branch names. -# -# * There should be a standard convention for the version number, +# * There should be a good convention for the version number, # and unfinalised or not changelog, after new-upstream. # # * Handing of multi-orig dgit new-upstream .dsc imports is known to # be broken. They may be not recognised, improperly converted, or # their conversion may be unrecognised. # -# * Docs need writing and updating. Even README.git-debrebase -# describes a design but may not reflect the implementation. -# # * We need to develop a plausible model that works for derivatives, # who probably want to maintain their stack on top of Debian's. # downstream-rebase-launder-v0 may be a starting point? +# maybe the hypothetical git-ffqrebase is part of it too. +# undocumented usages: +# +# git-debrebase [] downstream-rebase-launder-v0 # experimental + + ======================================== Theory for ffq-prev -- 2.30.2