svn team mailing list archive

[Michael Diers <mdiers@xxxxxxxx>]

Max Bowsher wrote:
> On 05/05/10 09:39, Michael Diers wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I'm about to merge our PPA branches with current Debian testing,
>> lp:debian/squeeze/subversion. I'm starting with karmic today, but I will
>> also create a new branch for lucid (and possibly maverick) next.
> 
> Skip maverick for now, there's no point at least until the toolchain is
> declared stable.
[...]

Max,

thanks for the advice.

The karmic build went fine in my local pdebuild. Still, I haven't pushed
my changes to lp:~svn/ubuntu/karmic/subversion/ppa yet, see below.

> The other detail that you'll see in what I did before is that I don't
> have a ~karmic1, etc, suffix on the package which I'd consider the
> primary line of development of the PPA packaging. The ~series1 suffices
> are essentially backport indicators, so there's a certain incongruity in
> creating a package which hints at being a backport of a version that
> never existed. Plus, it's an indicator which is considered the mainline
> packaging on which the next version should be merged.
> 
> I don't have overly strong feelings on whether you want to continue
> this, or just bluntly append ~series1 on all versions in the manner many
> PPA authors do, but now you know why I didn't.
> 
> 
> Note that the whole point of the differing versions for different
> distroseries is not only that they be distinct, but that the version
> numbers compare in the same way as the newness of the distroseries, such
> that when someone upgrades from karmic to lucid, the PPA lucid package
> is seen as an upgrade to the PPA karmic package.
> 
> Therefore, if you do the initial merge for karmic, and choose not to
> append a ~karmic1, it would be incorrect to append a ~lucid1 for a lucid
> build - instead you'd need to version it as 1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn2 or
> 1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn1lucid1.

One could probably argue that the most recent Ubuntu release (lucid)
should be the primary line of development of the PPA packaging.

I think that was also what Anders had in mind when he suggested the
following naming scheme:

subversion (1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn1) lucid
subversion (1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn1~karmic1) karmic
subversion (1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn1~jaunty1) jaunty

Hence I think it's best to do the lucid branch first. But I have a few
questions; I'm still learning about Bazaar's features.

I noticed that currently the branches are stacked, like so:

  lp:~svn/ubuntu/jaunty/subversion/ppa
    \
    lp:~svn/ubuntu/karmic/subversion/ppa
      \
      lp:ubuntu/lucid/subversion
        \
        lp:ubuntu/subversion

Does the following structure represent the intended stack after creation
of the lucid PPA branch?

  lp:~svn/ubuntu/jaunty/subversion/ppa
    \
    lp:~svn/ubuntu/karmic/subversion/ppa
      \
      lp:~svn/ubuntu/lucid/subversion/ppa
        \
        lp:ubuntu/maverick/subversion
          \
          lp:ubuntu/subversion

Is it correct to stack the lucid branch on top of
lp:ubuntu/maverick/subversion?

Do I have to reconfigure the karmic branch to sit atop the new lucid
branch? If so, how?

> I hope that was elucidating about the twisty labyrinth that is Debian
> package versioning :-)

Yes, indeed, thank you.

-- 
Michael Diers, elego Software Solutions GmbH, http://www.elego.de