On Sun, May 11, 2025 at 03:58:12PM -0700, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:

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.

+1

This seems overly complicated. The simplest way forward if to finalize DEP-14, and let maintainers and packagers adopt it whenever they feel
the benefit. You probably also want to wait a bit for tooling
maintainers to default to what DEP-14 suggests.

agreed.

Regardless of what branch names packages use today or in the future,
they should all have a debian/gbp.conf file that defines what branches
and packaging practices are being used *right now*.

I dont want to use git-buildpackage and I don't want a gpb.conf. Please accept this. Thanks.


--
cheers,
Holger

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
⠈⠳⣄

A ship is always safe at shore, but that is not what it's built for.
(Albert Einstein)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEuL9UE3sJ01zwJv6dCRq4VgaaqhwFAmghqAwACgkQCRq4Vgaa qhyvvw/7B0KNnawXWfsNSJZjCY35e2oyKO66wxA2aJdzOMOBtEtzo3UUMXcg41ga DRAqMY6DyUL6rHPviIYGnpZi32t909t1GWfsbxKW8bACZP7XJpkqkWkanuUhP1SI UKWamfKzDrfN/GrMHTHwrqt91a1JvmxkEwxonoQS+fXzJKUcVyABLlBilZcCpWSf lZr7SmfqDKt82Lt+8cgbv2pL4MnwaYQ3NF8hWWRlXgicjjYAxA9FZcfMBbu3iiWe WQeyYL65MpMFw9GdorCXaEPuLVUX1RDh3XRiqdJgYU5SEtrSResbODrViT4UtiuC P5O8c8Tfs8Pp+NMyUUNDWO8jZ9IuHp9v/ynwCuQXYWoJQly+SFWq5sYYlkJCORcC k4DpoxUhCROCSOQslspGL3Ab/CCLamnHd2sF9KPXoRx+fC8tML2M7uzx1+Tz8vPu ZebNOrC1R+t54Zjgo3l9xpswC+GgAMd5lj/S9Pg4E2f9+kwBVGooqRSQ9aYbX0ZA Mmn3OnGsr0m7N6OIvfXTqMeJRJSyIQlLiedElx4yNTCONQVxsVDdw6Iz4SfEWYHv u/IoMiARO9pYdbjhFd5LyoS5Q

On 11/05/25 at 23:40 +0200, Bßlint RΘczey wrote:

While this is accurate considering the latest DEP-14 version, it
should be noted that the first DEP-14 draft allowed 'master' as the
main branch for native packages and up to 2020-11-29 DEP-14
recommended debian/master instead of debian/latest.
Earlier adopters (like me) thus probably don't follow the latest
changes to DEP-14 because what's the point of renaming a perfectly
fine branch.

Here is the updated table, with 'count_dep14' being the sources that
use debian/latest, debian/sid or debian/unstable, and
count_loosely_dep14 adding those using debian/master:

salsa_group | count_dep14 | count_loosely_dep14 | count_total ------------------------+-------------+---------------------+-------------
go-team | 1491 | 1499 | 2338
debian | 980 | 1554 | 4253
python-team | 333 | 1506 | 2703
gnome-team | 321 | 321 | 329
perl-team | 268 | 268 | 3963
php-team | 211 | 215 | 268
multimedia-team | 152 | 159 | 606
homeassistant-team | 120 | 253 | 435
science-team | 74 | 116 | 856
DebianOnMobile-team | 74 | 83 | 83
pkg-octave-team | 72 | 72 | 73
js-team | 55 | 87 | 1677
games-team | 54 | 70 | 507
ruby-team | 51 | 55 | 1054
fonts-team | 48 | 54 | 393
lxqt-team | 48 | 48 | 48
swaywm-team | 27 | 28 | 31
virtualsquare-team | 26 | 26 | 26
java-team | 25 | 27 | 1089
pkg-security-team | 22 | 247 | 255
perl6-team | 21 | 21 | 26
emacsen-team | 20 | 52 | 340
lxde-team | 20 | 20 | 20
electronics-team | 19 | 21 | 79
math-team | 18 | 19 | 55
cinnamon-team | 18 | 19 | 21
roundcube-team | 16 | 16 | 16
pkg-voip-team | 16 | 17 | 44

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 12 May 2025 15:04:38 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

Regarding "I don't want a gbp.conf", I think that we should aim for DRY,
and that adding a gbp.conf in every package doesn't sound too great for
teams that maintain hundreds or thousands of packages...

Yes, please.


Cheers,
gregor, who has done this
"add-a-file-to-thousands-of-package-and-later-remove-it-again-dance"
too often

--
.''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer https://www.debian.org
: :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06
`. `' Member VIBE!AT & SPI Inc. -- Supporter Free Software Foundation Europe
`-

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQKTBAEBCgB9FiEE0eExbpOnYKgQTYX6uzpoAYZJqgYFAmgiOilfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEQx RTEzMTZFOTNBNzYwQTgxMDREODVGQUJCM0E2ODAxODY0OUFBMDYACgkQuzpoAYZJ qgYazA/+KwoXA6zQrg1Neia2k69sIyR3+KETOhC+Tf097cAj80VCY1sWPWv98ckO FTEAU2WX3Xq6nmK19Q7wxe78nDY15LCp7uB5Ygas5fO9S8OtNKgNxQsvl0nDuWKc m19qCQjfcfBgd+IeIqkJtwDZ7FxQHMXSt+M7ZoSyKKujwFPmN/6Y/z2Nohjdmlu4 izmnI9QRALinnmf14apbWrJ45yYqJm1nUrKs9lJDOh5UQ0Od87Tkx4tSqI3DDUX/ z1S2qxxNjiX8lOzDHDbwihucYJKSa1HbHshPK0Qab0fMM+nQPVXjb3mVSO8OGgZB bd+ahdVvrz5rRA0WhP3V9b0bCpA3IVGbJ8C1CE/TaeXHFK+aM6CTHDyD61vFpB/+ cUCdVzyNVg5J5a9IlSXty7KJNxIRG/h062FV2AIw/krn9sLXwehUK/j0GFYcb+1y VIyRbAzJPjdZTpOjZThvnTeVOErR9sEVVZ/5zgJOf4ygLNiWT1ULqAFEdenSb9jd Avi3VDLUjwfSLLyryGCvjqVx+c7lOV+AXDlIwUD504KbfWQQ22P1glBMhYByAbCV V7cz+91D6b/9TG9zUIbQvDAVislWRtr0zymsg8cceSBXYXSYvWu9M7hSbNz2Axf2 AGzhkH9cjwG8nW98SeHhlhQO1jX21VzQrL+4xmZ1f6zK0aOYo2M=
=74FL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Regarding "I don't want a gbp.conf", I think that we should aim for DRY, >and that adding a gbp.conf in every package doesn't sound too great for >teams that maintain hundreds or thousands of packages...

Yes, please.

That could have been an option 10 years ago when people were creating
the tools if the branch scheme and naming would have been standardized
at the same time. It didn't happen, and Debian has a culture now that
anyone can maintain their packages using whatever conventions they
already have. Thus having a human and machine redable file that is
explicit about what conventions are is at the moment the best thing to
do.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 11/05/25 at 22:36 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

On 09/05/25 at 12:43 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

I would love to see data about the actual acceptance of DEP-14 among packages in the archive: my feeling is that it is currently being a bit ignored by maintainers and teams (but maybe I'm wrong).

I started working on a salsa importer in UDD. It still needs some
polishing and Web pages to expose interesting results, but it already provides the following information:

* 37641 source packages in trixie/main
* of which 36083 declare a VCS URL
* of which 34644 point to a salsa project
* of which 34370 point to a salsa project that exists

[...]

This is now available at https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/dep14stats.cgi

Lucas

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Am Wed, May 14, 2025 at 09:40:54AM +0200 schrieb Lucas Nussbaum:

* 37641 source packages in trixie/main
* of which 36083 declare a VCS URL
* of which 34644 point to a salsa project
* of which 34370 point to a salsa project that exists

[...]

This is now available at https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/dep14stats.cgi

Thanks a lot
Andreas.

--
https://fam-tille.de

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)