[git-buildpackage] gbp push without upstream branch

[Markus Blatt]

Am Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 03:23:23PM +0100 schrieb Guido Günther:
>Hi,
>On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 03:16:11PM +0100, Markus Blatt wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 02:59:53PM +0100 schrieb Guido Günther:
>> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 01:52:06PM +0100, Markus Blatt wrote:
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I am trying to convert some of Packages to git-buildpackage and am struggling a bit about how to do that
>> > > with an upstream branch.
>> >
>> > You implicitly still have an upstream branch when you track upstream
>> > git: The branch you get from upstream the tags are on. Just use that as
>> > `upstream/latest`
>>
>> No, I don't. Upstream uses different release branches for their releases e.g. 2.10.* is on releases/2.10, 2.11.* on releases 2.11.*,
>> while development is in master.
>>
>> Hence I would need to create such a branch. I actually started with such a branch when experimenting with another package
>> and the merged the upstream releases there and resolved conflicts.
>
>Unrelated to the question but maybe useful as you likely have the same
>merge conflict issues on the packaging branch: `gbp import-ref` is there
>to import upstream git refs no matter what is currently on the Debian
>branch.
>

Yep that was useful. Thanks a lot.

>>
>> Then I read that I don't need such a branch if upstream uses git. Maybe that only holds of all releases are done
>> on one branch, though.
>
>Yes, that branch is purely optional. If you set `--upstream-branch=''`
>gbp-push should just ignore it.
>

Thanks a lot. That has worked.

A follow up question:

I have another package where I need to remove files because of dfsg.

Here I think that I need a branch to keep track of the modified source. By convention that is dfsg/latest for me.

Does it make sense to specify dfsg/latest as the upstream-branch to gbp? That way this gets pushed and pulled. The
branch seems needed for creating tarballs / pristine-tar.

Best,

Markus