WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.490
Thank you very much.

00:00:03.150 --> 00:00:05.060
Thanks everybody for coming,…

00:00:08.666 --> 00:00:12.186
If you are packaging software and you want
me to work on with you,

00:00:12.186 --> 00:00:13.526
this is how you can do that.

00:00:13.526 --> 00:00:15.156
It is a very self-??? talk:

00:00:15.156 --> 00:00:18.516
I just want to explain some of the things
that I like,

00:00:18.516 --> 00:00:21.366
some practice that I prefer about Debian
packaging,

00:00:21.366 --> 00:00:25.236
and I don't pretend this is any sort of…

00:00:25.236 --> 00:00:27.296
official, permanent or final thing.

00:00:27.296 --> 00:00:30.456
I just wanted to share some ideas that I
have about the way that I work with

00:00:30.456 --> 00:00:34.976
packages, in the hope that maybe, hmm,
for two hopes:

00:00:34.976 --> 00:00:38.057
One is that I hope that I can show you
something that you have not heard of,

00:00:38.057 --> 00:00:40.677
or maybe you were doing differently,

00:00:40.677 --> 00:00:42.417
or maybe you think it is
the right think to do

00:00:42.417 --> 00:00:43.877
and it is just nice to see
somebody else doing it.

00:00:43.877 --> 00:00:47.047
My second hope is that you can tell me
what I am doing wrong,

00:00:47.047 --> 00:00:51.047
and you can help me learn and improve
on my own packaging techniques.

00:00:51.047 --> 00:00:52.907
If you see something that
I am proposing up here,

00:00:52.907 --> 00:00:55.507
and you think there is a problem with it,
I would like to hear about it too.

00:00:55.507 --> 00:00:58.227
I just want to see more of the culture
within Debian,

00:00:58.237 --> 00:01:00.627
of people who are doing packaging,
explaining what they are doing,

00:01:00.627 --> 00:01:02.787
and so I thought I would
just step up and explain:

00:01:02.787 --> 00:01:04.497
"Here is some of the practice that I do",

00:01:04.497 --> 00:01:08.717
In the hope that other people will do the
same and explain what they are doing,

00:01:08.717 --> 00:01:12.717
and maybe they can learn from
me and I can learn from them.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Without much further ????, I am just going
to dive into it.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If you have questions, I am perfectly
happy to be interrupted,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
we have some folks with walking mics
in the crowd:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
you can just raise your hand.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I you have got a question or an
interruption or whatever,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that is fine.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I ??? I got the whole 15 minutes,
I think there are 20 minutes,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I ??? the whole time, so there will be
also time for questions at the end

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
if you prefer.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
But I do not mind being interrupted.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So, this is all on this web page here,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
you could probably skip this talk and go
read the web page,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but then you would not have the nice
??? actions,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and it is easier to tell me that I am
wrong in person,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
so I would like to have that happen.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I put this up on the Debian wiki,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
because I want anyone to be able to find
it.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If you thing you have got some good ideas,
you should put it on the Debian Wiki too:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
other people can take advantage of the
ideas that you have got.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
First baseline is: I really like revision
control.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And I know that it makes me a certain
flavor on nerd,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but when we are working with things that
are as complicated as software packages,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
hmmm, I think a lot of people don't get
that in Debian we are not just working on

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
one software package:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
you are actually probably, if you are doing
a responsibly work,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
on at least two software packages, and
maybe 5.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So you have got the version that is
unstable and you have got

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
the version that you try to maintain for
stable as well.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And we are committing to doing maintenance
work.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
A lot of our work in the project is ???
in nature:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
we want to clean up the mess and we want
us to stay out of the way and

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
to make sure things work, functionally,


99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
for people who are relying on the
operating system to not get in their way.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So revision control I think is really
helpful because it means you can

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
keep track of what changes you have done
on different branches of the project

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
while you are maintaining both of them.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Basically, ??? require working with
the revision system I am comfortable with,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I prefer Git, I am not going to have a
religious word about it.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If upstream uses Git, I am even happier,
and I try to make my packaging depend on

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
upstream's revision control.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I like to use 'git-buildpackage', and I
like to use it with debhelper.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If you have not tried out
'git-buildpackage',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
we are going to have a
'git-buildpackage' skill share session

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
later on today actually, and I welcome
you to come and share your tricks with it,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
or learn some tricks from other people.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
It is a particular way that you can keep
your Debian packaging in a Git repository,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and it helps you to keep track of all of
the changes that ave happened within

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
your packaging and within upstream to
make sure you are not accidentally

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
making other changes.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So it is very easy to go back and review
what you have done.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I find that really useful.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I definitely also like to keep upstream's
source code in the same revision control

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
system.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I like to keep the tarballs in the
revision control system because it means

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that if someone is interested, they can
uses a tool called 'debcheckout'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
You can use 'debcheckout' with a name of
a package:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
you say just "I am really interested in
package 'foo',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
let me see the source code for that":

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
debcheckout foo

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
You get the source code, and you get the
source code from a revision control

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
system that you can now track and you
can just propose changes on.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
You can also extract the tarball from that
revision control system.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
'debcheckout' actually works even if you
do not have upstream stuff in there,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but I like to keep it all in one revision
control system,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
it is just easier to find everything when
you want.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Some of these things that I prefer have
to do with what the upstream software

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
developer has done, so I am less inclined
to try the package an upstream software

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
project if they just throw tarballs here
over the wall to an FTP side

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
every now and then.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
It makes it more difficult for me to know
what they are doing,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and why they are doing it.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So i like it, I have already said, when
upstream uses Git,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I also like when upstream signs their
releases,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and say "hey, this is specific release",

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Because that is a signal that I can use,
or somebody else that understands the

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
project: as said "we think that this
something that other people can use",

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
or "this is a particular version we would
like other people to test".

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
There are a lot of other situations where
maybe it is not so important.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And having that be cryptographically
signed is really useful.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I care about cryptographic signature on
software because I want to know that

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
what I am running is related to the code
that somebody else out should be run.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And if you don't verify your software
cryptographically, anyone could

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
intercept the network connection
between you and that software,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and modify the software before it gets
to you.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And the cryptographic signature just says:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
"look, this is a version that I am OK
with. I am putting it out there and

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
it comes from me".

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And so I can have a trace back to that
point.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
??? just talk about briefly about how you
do cryptographic verification of upstream.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
You might know upstream: you might know
them personally, you know their key

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
already, that is fine.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
That is not the usual case: we work on
the Internet.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
In the situation where your upstream is
signing their tarballs

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and you have not met them, you do not
have to sign their key,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
you do not have to say "I announce this
is their key".

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
This is probably the same one that is
signing every release,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
so you should keep track of that.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Debian has a nice way to keep track of
that:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
you can tell Debian how to find the new
version of the upstream tarball.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
This is in the Debian 'watch' file.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If you type 'man uscan', you can learn
more about Debian 'watch',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and Debian 'watch' has now a feature that
lets you say

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
"that is not only this way you find the
tarball,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but upstream publishes signatures
and the signatures look like this".

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
You know, they got a '.sig' at the end.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So there is a particular arcane way to
specify that, but if you specify that,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
then 'uscan' can find not only the
upstream tarball but can find the

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
upstream signature and, if you drop
upstream's signing key -

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
which of course I did not put on the wiki
page, someone should add it that and

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
fix it - you can put the upstream signing
key in 'debian/upstream/signing-key.asc'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And then if you do that, when you say
'uscan', you can tell…

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Maybe some people here do notk
now how to use 'uscan'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
'uscan' is a very simple tool,
you run it from a software package that

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
has a 'debian' directory, or even one
level up if you keep all of your software

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
packages in one folder. You can go one
level up and say 'uscan', and it will look

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
in all of the folder that are children
of it, and look for new version by

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
trying to find for new upstreams versions
in 'debian/watch'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And if you have configured 'debian/watch'
properly, it can find the new upstream

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
signatures, and if you have got the
'upstream/signing-key.asc', then

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
it will actually verify the signature for
you as part of fetching the new

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
upstream tarball.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So you can get all of those things just
by setting ???? that way.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
There is a hand up down there, could we
get the mic down to the hand ?


99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Or to the person who has that hand, it is
not just a hand. [public laugh]

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[someone] Publish a tarball and a hash, '.sha1',
and sign that hash, '.sha1.asc'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Can 'uscan' cope with this and check the
signature on the hash and that the hash

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
belongs to that tarball ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[Daniel] I do not believe that 'uscan' can
do that currently. So anybody out there

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
who wants to make things better for the
world should go hack on 'uscan':

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that is a pretty straightforward thing
that we should fix because I agree

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that is common pattern.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[someone] I have no answer to this
question by I have another question:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
how do you convince upstreams who do
not release tarballs or who do

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
not set tags in Git ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[Daniel] Who do not make tags in Git ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[someone] Yes, if there is no tags you
can not check out a tarball.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Is there any good way to convince
upstream to do this ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[Daniel] Git has this nice feature, which
is that you can create a tag,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
which is associate with a particular
revision,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and you would like to have a tag
everywhere that a tarball has been

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
released from. I am tempted to pull up
a Git view and show people some tags.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The question that you ask is a social
one, not just a technical one,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and I actually find that my upstreams
are pretty responsive.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Usually I frame my request as "hey, it
looks like you made this tarball from

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
this particular commit 'id'. If you could
tag you releases, it would be really

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
helpful to me, and here is the command
that I would use to tag the release".

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And I say "git tag…" and of course I
can never remember so first I look it up,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but it is either 'tag name' 'commit id' or
'commit id' 'tag name'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
But I would look it up and I would write
the e-mail so that all they have to do is

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
they read it, understand my argument,
and execute one command.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And then it starts them ??????

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And if you say 'tag -s' then your tag will
be cryptographically signed, which

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I think is a really good thing to do too.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So, cryptographic verification of
upstream.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
As I said, I want to keep upstream's code
in the revision control system.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I also like to keep…

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
In my ideal case upstream is using Git:
I am using Git for packaging.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I actually like to keep upsteam's Git
history fully in my repository,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
so that I do not just have the tarballs,
but I actually have all of their commits.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And that turns out to be really useful
for two specific cases:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
In one case, there is a common scenario
where upstream will fix a bug,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but they have not made a release yet.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And that bug is really, really obviously
problematic for the folks who are

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
using Debian, so want to fix it.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
All I can do, because I have their full
revision history, I can use Git to "cherry

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
pick" the upstream commit.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And then I "cherry pick" that upstream
commit and I can have it applied

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
separately and release an Debian version
that has the fix, even before upstream

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
has made a release with the fix.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So one nice thing about having upstream
revision is that I can pull fixes from

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
upstream before they decided
to release it.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The other advantage is the other
way around.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Often when I am doing packaging,
I discover a problem,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and maybe I can fix the problem.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And if that maybe I am already shipping
a Debian package that fixes the problem.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If my Debian fixes can be directly applied
to upstream, then I can use whatever

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
their preferred upstream patch
submission guidelines are,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
whether it is a Github pull request, or
a patch to a mailing list,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
or a "hey can you pull this from my Git
repository over here", e-mail…

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The fact that I am using the same Git
history that they are using makes it

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
much easier for me to push my changes
back to them.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So, it sort of smooth the interaction if
you can consolidate and use the same

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
revision control system as their.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Towards that aim, I use a system now
called 'patch q',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
which is part of 'git buildpackage'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So 'git buildpackage' is 'gbp', 'patch q'
is 'pq',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
so to deal with 'patch q' you say
'gbp pq'

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and then you have some commands.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And what that does, is it takes…

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
How many of you are Debian packagers ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
How many of you package
software for Debian ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
A very large percentage, but not everyone.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I hope some folks are considering starting
packaging if you have not done it yet.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Of those of you who package software,
how many of you package software

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
with modifications, how many of you ship
a modified version of upstream sources ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Beyond the 'debian' directory, just Debian
patches ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So the common way to do that, for the
Debian 3.0 ??? packaging skill, is that in

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
your 'debian' directory you have a
'patches' sub-directory that has a set of

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
individual patches that apply certain
changes, and they are applied in order

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
based on the file called
'debian/patches/series'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So maintaining that is kind of a drag
when upstream makes big changes:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
then all of sudden you have got this set
of patches and they do not quite apply…

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I is a drag even you do not have it in
the 'debian/patches/' directory.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
But what Debian 'patch q' does is it maps
that directory of patches into a little

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
branch on your Git revision history.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So when you get a new upstream version,
you can say 'patch q rebase',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and it treats it just as Git: it takes the
'patch q'…

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
You have already imported the new version,
and it re-applies your patches,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and sometimes that means some minor
adjustments.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Git is really good at figuring out what
the right minor adjustments are to make,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and so all of the sudden the 'patch q' is
re-based, you refresh it in your revision

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
control system, and there you go.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So I like to use 'git-buildpackage' 'patch q',
tagging, as already brought up,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
thank you for that, I like to to tag
everything that I release,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I like to push that as soon as I can,
so that other people who are following

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
my work can now where my releases
come from.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The reason that I like other people
following my work is

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
they can fix my bugs easier.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I make mistakes, everybody makes mistakes,
and it is really important to me that

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
if someone catches one of my mistakes,
I can accept their feedback,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
their criticism, their improvements,
as easily as possible.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I want a low barrier to entry for people
to help me fix my problems,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
it is selfishness. So I try to patch it
and publish this things for people

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
can find it.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I am ??? on these pretty fast because
were are almost at the time.


99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I like to put in some place where other
people get to the them,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
at the moment I like to put them in
'collab-maint',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
it has some problems but it is better
than not publishing your stuff,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and it is nice because it is sort of
a public use.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I like to standardize how of my branches
are named, so if I am working on

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
something that has got a stable version,
that is for Jessie, I will name the branch

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
'jessie', because I ???

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
???? multiple branches ???

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I try to push as frequently as I have made
something that looks sensible.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I do not feel obliged to push my commits
to a public repository when I am still

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
experimenting, I actually really like to
experiment, and I also like to keep track

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
of my experiments while I am doing them.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So I try to push when there is a sensible
set of changes, and I am trying to get

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
myself to a point where I can understand
what I have done, even if it wrong.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If I can get myself to a conceptual point
where it is done, I will push my changes

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
so other people can see what I am
working on, and then work from there.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
That is OK to push something that is
wrong,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
as long as you push something that
people can understand.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
When you make a 'git commit' (if you are
working with Git),

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
One of the things that helps me to think
about commit messages…

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
People often think that commit messages
should say "what change you made".

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I think that the 'git patch' shows what
change what change you have made,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and I thin your commit messages should
say "why you made the change".

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
That is what people really want to read.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If you need to explain technically why
the thing that you did

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
maps to the conceptual thing that you
wanted to do, that is fine:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
do that in your commit message too.
But it is really important to say why

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
you made the change. It is not just like
"initialize variable to 'no'":

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
OK, we can see that from the patch,
but you what you are really saying

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
is "there was a crash if someone did 'x',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and we are avoiding that crash by
setting this to 'no'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So I like to send patches via email,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
so I try to configure Git email, which
make it really easy to just

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
push patches back upstream.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If I am starting taking over a project
that somebody else has past on,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and they did not use Git, I will try to
restore all of the imports.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I would be happy to talk with people
about how to do that,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
if you have questions come find me.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I like to keep my files ???? simple:
there is a tool 'wrap-and-sort',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that just canonicalizes your files to
make them look in a simple and

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
sensible way. And it is nice because it
means that everything is…

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
It does things like alphabetize your
list of build depends,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and brake them out one per line.
The nice thing about that,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
since you are using revision control,
when you make a change

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
to your build depends, the changes
become very easy to see:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
"oh, they added one new package here,
there is a single '+'".

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
When ???? so you can see that kind of
thing.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I like to use ? deb five ? to format
Debian copyright to be machine readable,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
it is nice for people who are doing scans
of the archive and try reason about

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
what the patterns are, and licensing of
free software.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And if I am doing something really crazy,
that is going to make a big change,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I like to use a feature branch in
revision control.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So we have got one minute left,
I want to open it up for other questions.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
????

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[attendee] You said you are using
'wrap-and-sort' which is nice,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I had learned that ???? editors
- 'cme' - do the same job,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and somehow does a better job:
it also ??? standard version

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
if it does not fit, or it makes VCS
fields properly has it should be.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
'cme fix dpkg-control' fixes your
control file.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[Daniel] 'cme' ? And it is in
what package ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[attendee] The package 'cme', in
unstable ????. In Jessie it is ????

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[Daniel] You are developing in unstable,
that is OK.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
'cme'
OK, thank you.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Other questions or suggestions,
or complains ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[attendee] If you change the original
source code, and do some commits,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
how do you convert that into a series
of ??? patches ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[Daniel] I use 'patch q' for that as well,
so what I do is I say

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
"I want to move over to my 'patch q'
view of the tree",

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and then I make may changes, I make
my commits,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and then I say
'gbp pq export',

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and it takes the 'patch q' that I am on
and dumps it back

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
into the Debian patches directory.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If you have not use 'gbp pq', I
recommend looking into it.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
It takes a little while to get used to,
and I still screwed it up sometimes,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but it makes easy to fix your
mistakes too.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[organizer] Last question ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[attendee] Do you think it is possible to
make this 'patch q' branch

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
"pullable" by upstream ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[Daniel] I do not actually think it is
possible to make it directly

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
"pullable" by upstream: I think upstream
can cherry pick patches from it,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but I do not see how to
make it "pullable".

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If someone else does, I would be
happy to learn.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[organizer] This was "before last",
so last.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[attendee] Do you have a recording of
you using the tools that you mentioned,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
a video recording would be great,
just to show your workflow ?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[Daniel] I do not really know how
to do that: if somebody wants to

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
help me do that I would be
happy to do it.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I am going to give one last plug,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I know we are out of time here,
sorry.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
This tool is called 'gitk'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
This is an example - sorry we
should leave - but this the way

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that I visualize my revision
control system.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
We could do a whole other session
about 'gitk'.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If you do not try to visualize your
revision control system,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
you are missing out: try to find a way
to visualize stuff,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
find one that works for you.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Thanks for coming.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
[organizer] Thank you.