[ITP] etckeeper 1.18.17-1

[Adam Dinwoodie]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 12:58:23PM +0200, Christian Franke wrote:
> I would like to contribute etckeeper.
> 
> https://etckeeper.branchable.com/
> https://repology.org/project/etckeeper/versions
> 
> etckeeper-1.18.17-1.hint:
> category: Utils
> requires: bash coreutils grep sed
> sdesc: "Store /etc in git or mercurial"
> ldesc: "Etckeeper is a tool to let /etc be stored in git or
> mercurial.  It hooks into Cygwin Setup to automatically commit changes
> made to /etc during package upgrades.  It tracks file metadata
> (permissions, owner, group) that version control systems do not
> normally support."
> 
> Package for review:
> wget -r -nH --cut-dirs=2 \
> https://chrfranke.de/cygwin/noarch/etckeeper/etckeeper-1.18.17-1.hint \
> https://chrfranke.de/cygwin/noarch/etckeeper/etckeeper-1.18.17-1-src.hint \
> https://chrfranke.de/cygwin/noarch/etckeeper/etckeeper-1.18.17-1-src.tar.xz
> \
> https://chrfranke.de/cygwin/noarch/etckeeper/etckeeper-1.18.17-1.tar.xz \
> https://chrfranke.de/cygwin/noarch/etckeeper/etckeeper-1.18.17-1.sha256
> 
> Tested with git. Only a few tests were done with hg.

LGTM!  I've not tested the actual function, but the packaging looks
sound, and I trust etckeeper enough that if the packaging is sound I'm
happy the rest will follow :)

I do wonder if it's worth trying to submit your patches upstream; they
seem like the sort of thing the upstream project might be interested in
taking, and it minimises the amount of work you have to do as a
maintainer.

I'm also vaguely pondering whether it's worth adding git as a
dependency.  That's not strictly right, since etckeeper doesn't *need*
git, but it's going to be the use case for 99.9% of users, and in the
absence of Cygwin having a "recommends" style dependency, just adding
git seems like it might be sensible.  But I'm far from convinced there.

Adam