-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Nov 13, 2013, at 10:48 PM, Stéphane Graber wrote:
>I push those commits to the main branch (ubuntu:<package>) as I go.
>It's true that the head of the branch doesn't reflect the source
>package, however the latest tag does, so that's not a real concern.
>What I like is that when I have a few simple changes or fixes that don't
>seem to warrant an upload on their own either because of a very long
>build time or because I know someone else is going to merge the package
>from Debian in the next few days, I can just commit stuff in there, add
>an UNRELEASED changelog entry and let whoever does the next major change,
>just pick up my changes at the same time.
>That also means people don't need to go looking for MP before uploading
>something as the change is already right there in the branch, all they
>need to do is to add theirs and upload.
>I've noticed that I'm not the only one doing that, I know that at least Steve
>is doing something similar with some packages ;)
Thanks for the workflow explanation - this is really interesting.
It seems to me like you're using the UDD branches in a very similar way as say
Debian Python uses its svn branches, as the primary location to make
incremental packaging changes in preparation for upload. I.e. it's your main
location for doing package development.
I think I better understand yours, Steve's, and others objections to my
suggestion. It's not how I think of the UDD branches but I'll retract my
suggestion because I wouldn't want to prohibit your workflows.
But this *is* getting off-topic from the original request, which is: how can
we empower developers to fix their own broken UDD branches?
Let's leave the future of UDD, and the reality of the given resources to
improve the situation and get closer to our dream world, for another day.