Re: [Tails-dev] WhisperBack configuration

Hi,

> From: intrigeri <intrigeri@???>
> Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:15:37 +0200
>
> alan@??? wrote (07 Aug 2012 18:29:37 GMT) :
> >> From: intrigeri <intrigeri@???>
> >>
> >> Can you please publish the commits and tag used to build the
> >> WhisperBack 1.6~alpha1 .deb?
>
> > I can do that, but I fail to see the interest to publish a changelog
> > entry and a tag for a release that only lives in an unfinished
> > feature branch.
>
> Seriously, do I really have to explain why it makes sense to publish
> a way to easily find the source of every published version number and
> binary package?
>
I do not consider a snapshot in feature branch (prone to rebase) a
"published vesrion".

> > What is the interest you see?
>
> I'll give only one: peer review. How will I compare the source of
> 1.6~alpha1 with the next ~alpha2 or 1.6 final or whatever, when $we
> release it, if these tags don't exist? I do know it's Python, and I do
> know about debdiff, but still, we use Git for a (few) reason(s).
>
I commited and push the changelog and related tag.

But I'm still not really convinced. It seems me we want to push more
stuff and more often to places where others can test, like experimental.
But adding a commit with a changelog entry and a tag each time a package
is built to be tested in experimental seems me quite annoying and
fulling history of not-that-useful commits.

What do you think if I do testing packages whose name and version ends
with gitb62b872 or something like that but no tag not changelog entry.
That enables to easily do peer review and relase checking too, no?

Cheers


--