Hi Simon, * Simon Richter <sjr@xxxxxxxxxx> [240820 09:11]: > One of the long-standing issues is that there are multiple ways Debian > packaging can be represented in a git tree, and none of them are optimal. [..] > A possible implementation would be a type of Git "user extension" object > that contains > > - an extension name > - an object type (interpreted by the extension) > - type-tagged references to other objects > - other type-tagged data [..] > Any feelings/objections/missed requirements? In the current DEP14/DEP18 discussions a lot of discussion was had about how we should represent Debian things in git; your mail also goes into this direction. My *feeling* is we should do the opposite - that is, represent less Debian stuff in git, and especially do it in less Debian-specific ways. IOW, no git extensions, no setup with multiple branches that contain more or less unrelated things, etc. I think we should move more towards a setup that is easily understood by people not closely following our Debian-specific things. We should avoid surprising things, again that would include the multiple branches and any git extensions. Before pushing for new ways of representing Debian stuff in git, I think it would be a good idea to learn from all the other distros and distro-like systems successfully using git [1]. Debian is not the only distro that wants to use git to capture changes and encourage contributions to its packages. Chris [1] alpine, homebrew, freebsd ports come to mind immediately. nixos and others too.
