logoalt Hacker News

Debian's Git Transition

180 pointsby all-alongtoday at 8:24 AM61 commentsview on HN

Comments

ckastnertoday at 2:41 PM

There is some nuance to this. Adding comments to the stated goal "Everyone who interacts with Debian source code (1) should be able to do so (2) entirely in git:

(1) should be able does not imply must, people are free to continue to use whatever tools they see fit

(2) Most of Debian work is of course already git-based, via Salsa [1], Debian's self-hosted GitLab instance. This is more about what is stored in git, how it relates to a source package (= what .debs are built from). For example, currently most Debian git repositories base their work in "pristine-tar" branches built from upstream tarball releases, rather than using upstream branches directly.

[1]: https://salsa.debian.org

show 1 reply
cryptonectortoday at 5:49 PM

The whole patch quilting thing is awful. Just keep the patches as commits. It won't "trick" me or anyone else, especially if you keep them in branches that denote "debian".

Please, please, stop the nonsense with the patch quilting -- it's really cumbersome, it adds unnecessary cognitive load, it raises the bar to contributions, it makes maintenance harder, and it adds _zero value_. Patch quilting is a lose-lose proposition.

show 5 replies
MarsIronPItoday at 4:41 PM

What I've always found off-putting about the Debian packaging system is that the source lives with the packaging. I find that I prefer Ports-like systems where the packaging specifies where to fetch the source from. I find that when the source is included with the packaging, it feels more unwieldy. It also makes updating the package clumsier, because the packager has to replace the embedded source, rather than just changing which source tarball is fetched in the build recipe.

show 3 replies
evolve2ktoday at 8:57 PM

Correct me if I’m wrong but as I’m understanding it, the processes is well underway towards moving the core systems and libraries (or whatever it’s all called) across to the new way. But that there’s a massive job of extended libraries maintained by lots of other parties and this ecosystem of libraries have been using all manner of approaches, each of which has its drawbacks and the big goal here is to get all these maintainers onboard to switch over to the new git-based workflow that this transition team (and others) have been working hard to make logical and easy enough to implement.

Is that a fair general read of the situation? (I have further comments to make but wanted to check my basic assumptions first).

Valodimtoday at 1:45 PM

Oh, yes. This seems like nothing short of necessary for the long term viability of the project. I really hope this effort succeeds, thank you to everyone pushing this!

show 2 replies
jancsikatoday at 4:17 PM

> The canonical git format is “patches applied”.

How many Debian packages have patches applied to upstream?

show 3 replies
rilindotoday at 4:28 PM

I always thought that Debian is already on git, so this confused me. How is source control currently (or was) done with the Debian project?

show 1 reply
mschuster91today at 1:23 PM

Now if a consequence of that could be that one (as an author of a piece of not-yet-debianized software) can have the possibility to decently build Debian packages out of their own repository and, once the package is qualified to be included in Debian, trivially get the publish process working, that would be a godsend.

At the moment, it is nothing but pain if one is not already accustomed and used to building Debian packages to even get a local build of a package working.

show 2 replies
djaouentoday at 10:01 PM

I remember when a startup I used to work for made the transition from svn to git. They transitioned, then threw the guy who suggested the transition under the bus; he quit, and then the company collapsed. Lol!

show 1 reply
trebligdivadtoday at 4:37 PM

This is great; I hate fighting distro source tools when I want to debug something.

show 1 reply
shevy-javatoday at 5:40 PM

Debian is kind of slow in adapting to the modern world.

I kind of appreciate that debian put FOSS at a core value very early on; in fact, it was the first distribution I used that forced me to learn the commandline. The xorg-server or rather X11 server back then was not working so I only had the commandline, and a lean debian handbook. I typed in the commands and learned from that. Before this I had SUSE and it had a much thicker book, with a fancypants GUI - and it was utterly useless. But that was in 2005 or so.

Now, in 2025, I have not used debian or any debian based distribution in a long time. I either compile from source loosely inspired by LFS/BLFS; or I may use Manjaro typically these days, simply because it is the closest to a modern slackware variant (despite systemd; slackware I used for a long time, but sadly it slowed down too much in the last 10 years, even with modern variants such as alienbob's slackware variant - manjaro moves forward like 100x faster and it also works at the same time, including when I want to compile from source; for some reason, many older distributions failed to adapt to the modern era. Systemd may be one barrier here, but the issue is much more fundamental than that. For instance, you have many more packages now, and many things take longer to compile, e. g. LLVM and what not, which in turn is needed for mesa, then we have cmake, meson/ninja and so forth. A lot more software to handle nowadays).

show 1 reply
shmerltoday at 3:57 PM

I wish Debian would also transition to a modern bug tracker. Current one is very archaic.

show 2 replies