• Re: Moving default branch after project creation

    From Julian Gilbey@21:1/5 to Alexandru Mihail on Wed Aug 7 22:40:01 2024
    On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 08:27:33PM +0300, Alexandru Mihail wrote:
    Hi, I've recently created https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/psrecord following
    previous ITP. The main branch was set to main and I'd like to move it
    to DEP compliant debian/master and delete the main branch. 

    The candidate DEP-14 (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/)
    currently reads:

    In Debian this means that uploads to unstable and experimental
    should be prepared either in the debian/latest branch or
    respectively in the debian/unstable and debian/experimental
    branches.

    I'm not sure where you got debian/master from?

    (Maybe I screwed up by forgetting to uncheck the Readme.md first commit
    ?)
    I cannot delete the default branch as expected, but Salsa doesn't let
    me move it to debian/master either. I think I don't have the required permissions.
    remote: GitLab: The default branch of a project cannot be deleted.
    To salsa.debian.org:python-team/packages/psrecord.git
    ! [remote rejected] main (pre-receive hook declined)
    error: failed to push some refs to 'salsa.debian.org:python- team/packages/psrecord.git'

    Have you tried using the web interface to change the default?
    (Settings > Repository) Create a new branch called debian/latest,
    branched from master, then set the default branch to debian/latest
    (and perhaps unprotect the master branch on the same page).

    Best wishes,

    Julian

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Nicholas D Steeves@21:1/5 to Julian Gilbey on Thu Aug 8 01:00:01 2024
    Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> writes:

    On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 08:27:33PM +0300, Alexandru Mihail wrote:
    Hi, I've recently created
    https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/psrecord following
    previous ITP. The main branch was set to main and I'd like to move it
    to DEP compliant debian/master and delete the main branch.Ā 

    The candidate DEP-14 (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/) currently reads:

    In Debian this means that uploads to unstable and experimental
    should be prepared either in the debian/latest branch or
    respectively in the debian/unstable and debian/experimental
    branches.

    I'm not sure where you got debian/master from?

    FYI debian/master was DEP14:

    Changes
    2014-11-05: Initial draft by Raphaƫl Hertzog.
    2016-11-09: Extended version mangling to troublesome dots -- Ian Jackson.
    2020-11-29:
    * Replace <vendor>/master with <vendor>/latest
    * Recommend <vendor>/<suite> over <vendor>/<codename> for the devel branch
    * For native packages, require the default branch to be a devel branch
    * Minor typo fixes and cosmetic changes
    * Promote DEP to State: CANDIDATE
    Last edited Fri, 08 Mar 2024 12:33:22 +0000
    https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/

    It's certain that there are many packages that follow DEP14 DRAFT rather
    than CANDIDATE. An alternative interpretation is that DEP14 strong
    recommends (ie "should use", "should be", "we recommend")
    <vendor>/latest rather than <vendor>/master. Thus, <vendor>/master is
    arguably still more DEP14 than not. We've also seen the proliferation
    of <vendor>/main development branches that fulfil all of the technical objectives of DEP14, and I would consider them to also be DEP14.

    As an aside, I'm curious what the undocumented 2024 edit was.

    Best,
    Nicholas

    --=-=-Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQJEBAEBCgAuFiEE4qYmHjkArtfNxmcIWogwR199EGEFAmaz+lYQHHN0ZW5AZGVi aWFuLm9yZwAKCRBaiDBHX30QYe8GD/92wFDHcpC/nKh6E7GE8WRihQAq1ZXwOhBf 2DqPiZm+IDL0xOrqUhHN4Q8pfFyWeDcsLc+rNp0SFj5rb7qzBBf2G3wYAh17u9pm L1UZkQczOOPnqM5KBFL6tjpJjigO4UrC/x7xhxvQbo97WDTAPvEEVvTo6EsMoJ1P 7BOTz8LRcL2mQLzdgaoxvYGU1bP6ZQwWrYVq/9RrW6gs2ME9QaEkcfgTvBgZ4U2T nOZdtnGhG3uFCSZ3fDzlEb5No8jwl8JhUc0lxeTXiGttVmhon4/ouWRGJ6+qzm5c xtZTE1sHt6TwpeET4REGE0FDdBfU6MwILxNIuxc7JjjFXJvyblh6Nt1EvIYxuWWp thU0PnalKita61IfDjK08R63IrgQugviycF6mwQMQhgjrGfNQqOGIlNylDY3YgAn qpsOQdK8GE0t/MahKYX1zgHxIYFFiyn9Wnb68l/ZGFmY724uQhIc1vhDXZqD5Y80 cln77RtbZEFL27KROKBUlBubHk5ZjLJ874rx5Tsp8d/srhuG7c51iJnzG42kUKPo O6Qw6TZip1TFoUozA+s2Ic9lGwKrqxQFarX2WwEpNziVp38mN6eKAhG/A0EnQHBh HYbDSyfQ1lMu3rX67mqf/OYlv/h1vt5g4eHWV3XmykssCT+vtjAuXNY9qZCIoZh8 mlkZFfO/oQ==2sch
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carsten Schoenert@21:1/5 to All on Thu Aug 8 06:00:01 2024
    Am 07.08.24 um 22:33 schrieb Julian Gilbey:

    The candidate DEP-14 (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/) currently reads:

    In Debian this means that uploads to unstable and experimental
    should be prepared either in the debian/latest branch or
    respectively in the debian/unstable and debian/experimental
    branches.

    I'm not sure where you got debian/master from?

    From the Team Policy?

    https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst#branch-names

    --
    Regards
    Carsten

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Julian Gilbey@21:1/5 to Carsten Schoenert on Thu Aug 8 08:00:01 2024
    On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 05:50:38AM +0200, Carsten Schoenert wrote:
    Am 07.08.24 um 22:33 schrieb Julian Gilbey:

    The candidate DEP-14 (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/) currently reads:

    In Debian this means that uploads to unstable and experimental
    should be prepared either in the debian/latest branch or
    respectively in the debian/unstable and debian/experimental
    branches.

    I'm not sure where you got debian/master from?

    From the Team Policy?

    https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst#branch-names

    The OP specifically said they got it from DEP-14. Thanks also to
    Nicholas for reminding me of the DEP-14 history!

    Best wishes,

    Julian

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carsten Schoenert@21:1/5 to All on Thu Aug 8 09:00:01 2024
    Am 08.08.24 um 07:54 schrieb Julian Gilbey:
    The OP specifically said they got it from DEP-14. Thanks also to
    Nicholas for reminding me of the DEP-14 history!

    I don't see what makes the difference in the end?

    There is a DPT policy that enforces to usage of the branch name
    debian/master for working on versions intended for unstable/sid.

    Alexandru has permissions of the group Developer according to the
    members list overview. It might be that this membership is restricted to
    not being able to change the default branch. I haven't looked deeper
    into this.

    The current structure of the tree is wrong to me or at least contains a
    useless branch.

    $ git logg
    * commit 4c0b559c9f60321be2fa412d73555ab38c517f16 (origin/pristine-tar)
    Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
    Date: Wed Aug 7 19:11:03 2024 +0300

    pristine-tar data for psrecord_1.4.orig.tar.gz

    * commit 1443d1a19aeed367f2f2131757f01e2b9eafcfb4 (tag: upstream/1.4, origin/upstream, origin/debian/master)
    | Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
    | Date: Wed Aug 7 18:46:41 2024 +0300
    |
    | New upstream version 1.4
    |
    * commit 4c41bddf5c750a5c694aaba42c8252b444856ff7 (HEAD -> main, origin/main, origin/HEAD)
    Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
    Date: Wed Aug 7 15:21:38 2024 +0000

    Initial commit

    There is the branch 'main' which contains just one file 'Readme.md'.

    That one single commit is the parent for the two branches 'upstream' and 'debian/master' which includes the upstream source I guess as there is
    also the tag upstream/1.4.

    @Alexandru
    For starting a packaging the git tree on Salsa is quite the last thing
    you need to deal with (except you need a repo quite early in case of
    needed and wanted collaboration with others).

    I guess you did something like this at the start, if not you could do it
    this way.

    $ # get the upstream tarball e.g. into ~/Downloads
    $ mkdir python-psrecord
    $ cd python-psrecord
    $ $ git init
    $ $ gbp import-orig --verbose --sign-tags --pristine-tar --upstream-branch=upstream --debian-branch=debian/master ~/Downloads/psrecord-1.4.tar.gz
    $ git branch -a
    * debian/master
    pristine-tar
    upstream
    $ git logg
    * commit 6dc6446feb741badb628632a20a8fd64be3dd98e (HEAD ->
    debian/master, tag: upstream/1.4, upstream)
    Author: Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de>
    Date: Thu Aug 8 08:17:32 2024 +0200

    New upstream version 1.4

    * commit a309926d28d52527e88e3c96c7d2ec2c4b74347d (pristine-tar)
    Author: Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de>
    Date: Thu Aug 8 08:17:32 2024 +0200

    pristine-tar data for psrecord_1.4.orig.tar.gz

    Or you create the folder debian/ and here a file gbp.conf with this
    minimal content:

    [DEFAULT]
    pristine-tar = True
    compression = gz
    debian-branch = debian/master
    upstream-branch = upstream

    and use than for importing this command

    $ gbp import-orig --verbose --sign-tags ~/Downloads/psrecord-1.4.tar.gz


    If you are not that familiar with the GitLab/Salsa UI I strongly suggest
    you start the packaging in your own namespace and ask for reviewing, the
    git tree can later be easily moved into the DPT namespace!
    In your name space you can do e.g. force pushing, branch and tag
    deleting that are not allowed normally if you use the official DPT
    namespace.

    For now I suggest to delete all content in https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/psrecord so an empty
    repository is left.

    Also add please some more information into the field of the project
    description e.g. what the upstream url of the project is.

    If you not able to delete the now existing stuff please raise your
    hands. The repo could also moved into your namespace so you would have
    full access rights.

    BTW: Within the ITP #1075810 you stated you want to maintain this
    package on your own, did you changed your minds?

    And please use python-psrecord as source package name, psrecord is quite generic. A name python-psrecord would show it is a Python related package.

    --
    Regards
    Carsten

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin@21:1/5 to Carsten Schoenert on Thu Aug 8 09:50:01 2024
    On 2024-08-08 08:42, Carsten Schoenert wrote:
    $ gbp import-orig --verbose --sign-tags --pristine-tar --upstream-branch=upstream --debian-branch=debian/master ~/Downloads/psrecord-1.4.tar.gz

    I suggest to use `upstream/latest` as upstream branch.
    It spares you separating upstream/latest, upstream/master,
    upstream/whatever later.

    Cheers

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carsten Schoenert@21:1/5 to All on Thu Aug 8 13:10:01 2024
    Hi Martin,

    Am 08.08.24 um 09:49 schrieb Martin:
    On 2024-08-08 08:42, Carsten Schoenert wrote:
    $ gbp import-orig --verbose --sign-tags --pristine-tar
    --upstream-branch=upstream --debian-branch=debian/master
    ~/Downloads/psrecord-1.4.tar.gz

    I suggest to use `upstream/latest` as upstream branch.
    It spares you separating upstream/latest, upstream/master,
    upstream/whatever later.

    again, using plain 'upstream' is current DPT policy. :-)
    And it's a good choice to me.

    For me using 'upstream-1.x' or 'upstream/1.x' doesn't make much
    difference as branch name for keep track of e.g. the 1.x release.

    But using 'upstream/latest' instead of just 'upstream' makes much of
    difference in case you need to deal 80%-95% with releases that are the
    current rolling release, it safes me much more often from a needed
    further completion of the branch name!

    In other words, I would be against changing the current policy regarding
    the default upstream branch name.

    --
    Regards
    Carsten

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carsten Schoenert@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 12 08:20:01 2024
    Am 10.08.24 um 00:01 schrieb Alexandru Mihail:
    Thanks everyone for chiming in !
    Debates around the branch name aside, I still can't find out how to
    access the Gitlab settings button to change the default to anything.
    It's a permissions thing I think. When I access a project under my
    personal namespace I see the settings button, all is well. Here, it's
    just missing. I was able to create the project, of course.

    The structure of the tree hasn't changed since the last time i was
    looking into, did you read my previous email in detail?

    $ git logg
    * commit 4c0b559c9f60321be2fa412d73555ab38c517f16 (origin/pristine-tar)
    Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
    Date: Wed Aug 7 19:11:03 2024 +0300

    pristine-tar data for psrecord_1.4.orig.tar.gz

    * commit 1443d1a19aeed367f2f2131757f01e2b9eafcfb4 (tag: upstream/1.4, origin/upstream, origin/debian/master, upstream)
    | Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
    | Date: Wed Aug 7 18:46:41 2024 +0300
    |
    | New upstream version 1.4
    |
    * commit 4c41bddf5c750a5c694aaba42c8252b444856ff7 (HEAD -> main, origin/main, origin/HEAD)
    Author: Alexandru Mihail <alexandru.mihail2897@gmail.com>
    Date: Wed Aug 7 15:21:38 2024 +0000

    Initial commit

    The structure of the tree is simply wrong, given you are at the
    beginning I suggest to drop the current tree and restart from scratch
    within your namespace.
    For me it makes no sense to work further on that base. It make things unnecessary harder.

    Once it's working on your side it's easy to push then the tree to the
    repo on the DPT in Salsa again.

    --
    Regards
    Carsten

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)