> I'll upload it using git-ubuntu style, too, so it will be easier to do the next merge.
I must get Robie to remind me what I need to stuff in the .changes file to make that automatic (I vaguely recall him mentioning there were some extra tags that could/should be placed there).
> Using a "ubuntu/bionic" gbp branch, is probably as useless as using a "debian/unstable" branch in Ubuntu's development release. I wonder if we could/should drop that part of the delta on the next occasion.
Yes -- during the merge I initially dropped that change, but then reverted it because it made the range-diff a little noisier for no particularly good reason. Still, I do agree it's basically pointless and should be dropped.
> This seems to be generally useful. Would you mind sending this patch to Debian, so we can eventually drop it from our delta?
> I'll upload it using git-ubuntu style, too, so it will be easier to do the next merge.
I must get Robie to remind me what I need to stuff in the .changes file to make that automatic (I vaguely recall him mentioning there were some extra tags that could/should be placed there).
> Using a "ubuntu/bionic" gbp branch, is probably as useless as using a "debian/unstable" branch in Ubuntu's development release. I wonder if we could/should drop that part of the delta on the next occasion.
Yes -- during the merge I initially dropped that change, but then reverted it because it made the range-diff a little noisier for no particularly good reason. Still, I do agree it's basically pointless and should be dropped.
> This seems to be generally useful. Would you mind sending this patch to Debian, so we can eventually drop it from our delta?
Will do.