On 14.04.2021 17:19, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
That's not my experiance. The cases where I know of maintainers are using a source-git model with Fedora / RHEL already, are doing so precisely because it makes ongoing maint and rebasing waaaaay easier than with dist-git, especially when there are alot of downstream patches (100's or even 1000's).
In some cases, yes.
I woudn't expect Fedora to track the git-master in most cases. You generally still want Fedora to be base off releases, so you'd want to track starting fron a release tag or branch.
One more question. If the upstream ignores tags, can I create tags myself in source-git?
There are several ways you can do source git and they don't all imply force pushes, so I think this is probably inventing a problem where none yet exists.
You need force pushes support in order to perform git rebases.
eg if upstream has v1.0 and v1.2 tags, I might have a 'v1.0-f33' branch, and if I rebase Fedora to v1.2, then I'd just switch to using a v1.2-f33 branch instead. The v1.0-f33 history remains intact forever, no force push required to rebase to new version.
Looks like a dirty hack. Another pain for the maintainers. -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
