Ubuntu/bzr stories update
vincent.ladeuil at canonical.com
Wed Nov 4 09:27:37 GMT 2009
>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Bennetts <andrew.bennetts at canonical.com> writes:
Andrew> I agree. I didn't mean “loom-like” to necessarily
Andrew> mean looms.
>> There are at least three kind of important branches:
>> - the upstream ones,
>> - the debian ones,
>> - the ubuntu ones.
>> It's true that an Ubuntu dev will be mainly interested (probably)
>> by a loom in the end, but the above branches are still important
>> and interacting with them may not be trivial with just a loom
>> (not to mention looms can be scary for newcomers)
Andrew> My feeling is that:
Andrew> a) the more ordinary the underlying bzr
Andrew> representation is, the better (for saner development
Andrew> and debugging of tools, etc), but also...
Andrew> b) most of the time the exact details of how bzr +
Andrew> plugins are tracking this stuff is not important to
Andrew> the developers.
Andrew> I think they'd ideally be working with tools that
Andrew> support operations that operate on the level of “use
Andrew> different upstream version”, “add a patch”, “revise a
Andrew> patch”, “drop a patch”, “compare patch set in mine
Andrew> with patch set from Debian”, etc. If we make these
Andrew> things easier to do, we're succeeding. If the
Andrew> abstraction is very leaky and they keep having to
Andrew> poke at e.g. bzr-builder recipes then I think bzr
Andrew> will be as much a hindrance as a benefit.
>> Upstream may or may not use bzr (or any DVCS tool), the wiki
>> pages imply that the debian branches will not be available in a
>> first step and James is working hard to populate the Ubuntu ones.
Andrew> Yes, mapping or importing packages (for packages not
Andrew> maintained with bzr in this way) in a useful way is
Andrew> going to be important.
I have doubts about that, I think it should possible have a
working solution even if the upstream branches are not available.
Of course the available history will be poorer in that case, but
we can still provide a working solution.
Andrew> The huge diversity of packaging methodologies is
Andrew> going to be a real PITA here, but at the least we
Andrew> should try to have an answer for packages that have a
Andrew> set of distinct patches.
Yes, that's the important point.
More information about the bazaar