Re: How to cope with patches sanely
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:48:47 +0000, Matthew Johnson <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> On Thu Feb 07 22:42, Ben Finney wrote:
>> In the scenario Manoj presents above, the modifications applied to
>> upstream are easily available all in one place: the foo.diff.gz.
> But all as one patch, not as your nice separated list of commits
> and/or branches.
True. We now have to evaluate the benefits of providing sources
that the binary packages are built from with no fuss (dpkg -x); which
can then be inspected and patched.
How often do people performing NMU's have to figure out the
various threads of development which are merged into the
integration branch (which is what is uploaded to Debian)? It is not as
if the threads of development are not available; and people actively
helping to develop the Debian package could just learn the DCVS tool --
but that is not the use case I thought we were considering.
> This patch format can then be created from DVCSen if you like that,
> quilt if you like that or diff/patch if you like that. It still has
> separate, commented patches, but doesn't require the security team to
> know '*every* patch bundle system' or to know how to deal with a DVCS.
What is the use case this effort is designed to address? I
have not actually heard NMU/porters express a need for converting
monolithic patches to patch series. Have I missed the need statements?
"All Bibles are man-made." Thomas Edison
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C