Quoting Guido Günther (2021-10-09 17:11:27)
Hi, On Sat, Oct 09, 2021 at 10:25:20AM +0200, Carsten Schoenert wrote: [..snip..]
https://source.puri.sm/pureos/packages/lollypop contains no local feature commits (i.e. no feature changes, only boilerplate changes to packaging metadata) so does not illustrate well how to best tackle package upgrades. What it does illustrate is that it didn't preserve earlier PureOS work - i.e. the work tracked at https://source.puri.sm/librem5-apps/lollypop
That is unfortunately correct. :( I wasn't aware that there was already a lollypop tree until now. Then we need to think about how get that split fixed.
I wasn't aware of
https://source.puri.sm/librem5-apps/lollypop
when importing, sorry.
We can preserve that history in the pureos/packages/lollypop repo need be or just leave it as is and use that fork in unlikely case we need updates for amber-phone. Both works for me.
That particular work of mine is not important for me that we preserve.
If topic of this conversation is _simplest_ practice then let's just throw away historic git repos.
I pointed to that historic git repo because a) it was unclear to me what Carsten wanted to say (he also referenced missing posts by Guido still unavailable to me¹), and b) I mistakenly focused on finding _best_ practice.
- Jonas
¹ Seems many posts from Guido has reached only cc'ed participants in discussions, not this list. As a concrete example, this email is a response to an email from Guido with Message-ID YWGxH0nt5AnmfYO9@qwark.sigxcpu.org which I received but does not appear at https://lists.puri.sm/pipermail/pureos-project/2021-October/thread.html