... | @@ -47,3 +47,18 @@ to needlessly complicated redundant and difficult compliance with very particula |
... | @@ -47,3 +47,18 @@ to needlessly complicated redundant and difficult compliance with very particula |
|
layout.
|
|
layout.
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEP-14 might be a good idea only to small subset of packages but definitely not as default.
|
|
DEP-14 might be a good idea only to small subset of packages but definitely not as default.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debian packaging repositories need no "debian/" name space for branches
|
|
|
|
unless that change is aimed to resolve conflicts with upstream branch
|
|
|
|
names.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most branches except "master" represent "seasonal" work. There is no need
|
|
|
|
enforce branch naming convention for that.
|
|
|
|
I've found that in most cases having the following branches is enough:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* `master` (default branch)
|
|
|
|
* `experimental` (optional, when required)
|
|
|
|
* `buster-backports` (optional, when needed)
|
|
|
|
* `buster` (optional)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conclusion: DEP-14 creates more problem than it aims to solve. |