build-from-branch into the primary archive

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 01:01:45AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 22, 2011 12:47:15 am Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 03:57:16PM +1100, Martin Pool wrote:

> > > Regarding where it is done, I see no problem with doing it in
> > > debian/control.  If it's configured in the package itself we would
> > > have the option to give a warning at the time people run dput rather
> > > than later sending mail back from Soyuz complaining about it.

> > If you're going to put it in debian/control, then I think a Vcs-Bzr: field
> > pointing at a UDD branch already encodes this information - 'apt-get
> > source' already warns about it, we might as well have dput warn on the
> > same thing.

> Apt-get source already warns on any vcs fields (including Debian ones), so
> I think if you're going to depend on those, then it won't be very
> effective.  I think the idea of some kind of UDD specific 'are you sure'
> sort of option is reasonable.  Failing to consult non-UDD branches doesn't
> have the same effect.  It may result in things getting out of sync, but it
> doesn't result in history in the VCS getting over-written.

I think if a Vcs-Bzr field points at a UDD branch, that *is* UDD specific.
The information is already there; there's no reason to encode the same
information in a different field, and unlike for Vcs* fields generally, if
it points at a UDD branch in Launchpad, we have a high degree of certainty
that we're not looking at stale metadata from Debian.

It's straightforward to have the 'are you sure' option check specifically
for UDD branches in this field.

> P.S. I see those warning all the time and I confess I almost never look at
> the VCS.  I don't recall it having been a poblem and I don't expect I'll
> change.  I suspect I'm not alone in this.

I often leave staged changes in UDD branches of packages that I'm working on
(not for very long, unless the Vcs-Bzr field *is* marked).  It invariably
makes more work for me to reconcile the branch with the archive after the
fact than it would've taken someone else to commit to the branch in the
first place.  I call that a problem.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20110221/7c56f8b9/attachment-0001.pgp>