[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: divergence from upstream as a bug

On Mon, 19 May 2008, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Even simpler: Fixes: #nnn downgrades the severity to wishlist, adds "To
> be merged upstream:" to the subject, and sends a message saying "This
> bug has been fixed by patching the original sources; we will forward
> this patch to the upstream authors and close this bug report when
> upgrading the Debian package to an upstream source in which the patch
> has been merged or obsoleted".

I don't really like the idea to have "Fixes:" and "Closes:" do different
things. It basically means the same thing and would lead to
very different results. That's not something that I'd like to implement in
dpkg-dev (with my dpkg maintainer hat).

I would suggest as alternative, that this information should be stored in
the fields preceding the patch. And dpkg-genchanges/dak shouldn't process
anything with respect to that.

However the tool that grabs the patch and publish it in patches.debian.org
should certainly tag the bug number with divergence. (And since that tool
could use real patches coming from 3.0 (quilt) packages or generated
patches coming from any other VCS-based source packages, everybody would
be happy)

Fix-Debian-Bug: 50000
Forwarded-Upstream: http://bugzilla...
Author: Random Joe <joe@example.net>
 The behaviour A was wrong when B. This patch makes sure to do C in that
 case as this is what the user expects.

[patch follows]

Raphaël Hertzog

Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :

Reply to: