Good afternoon. Can you hear me?
Good afternoon. Sorry for the delay.
Welcome to Lightning Talks!
We have... 5 people doing 6 things,
and first up is Sean.
Hello!
Uh, I'm Sean.
Um, so,
Dgit is a multifaceted project
trying to solve a lot of problems at once
and the source package certainly is (one of those)
I wanted to briefly talk about
one of the things that dgit makes better, that
is the reason why you should consider
incorporating dgit push
into your existing workflows.
So, one of the things that we offer our users
in our stable releases
is that(?) we say: Look, we are going to make sure
that you can do apt-get source,
apt-get build-dep <package name>
and then, it will (be) built
Right? That's one of the things we ensure
and it's a nasty bug if that doesn't work.
But, apt-get source is a pretty old-fashioned way
to get a source for something running on your computer.
in particular, like you can't commit things
and then revert them
you can't make branches
you can't manipulate the source in all the ways you can with git.
So, often what I think people will
probably do
is apt-get source and then just commit everything to git.
Now, dgit clone is kind of a shortcut there
dgit clone will "apt-get source" and commit it to git, roughly.
(there's more stuff going on)
But that's one way to understand it.
And that's the git history you get, if you type dgit clone
when the maintainer just uploaded the package with dput.
So, it's kind of useful, it's in git now, so you can type git clean
and it's pretty convenient.
But I think we could do a lot better for our users.
We could give them the whole packaging history
and eventually even the upstream history.
Which is a lot powerful for debugging problems on their system.
So, that's what you get when you do dgit clone, when it wasn't dgit-pushed.
What happens when it was ?
Well, that's what you get.
If someone like I did, typed "dgit push",
then, when the user types "dgit clone",
they get this rich history, which is useful information, for debugging,
making reverts, and upstream changes for example, and then trying build it.
Or, you know, that kind of stuff.
And as you see, the dgit push command has gbp in it.
Like this wasn't a fancy git (??)ry-based workflow or anything like that.
All I did was drop dgit --gbp push
in my existing team gbp workflow.
So if you're in a team that has gbp-based worflow,
consider incorporating dgit push and give this extremely useful thing
to our users.
Thanks !