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

Re: divergence from upstream as a bug

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> The downside is that a bug can't simply be downgraded from fixed to
> patched; it would have to be marked found and patched in the same
> version, but that's hopefully a relatively rare situation.

Why do we need to track which revisions have divergence?[1]
Divergences aren't an issue for release managers, nor are they an
issue for users.

There are only two questions about divergences that the BTS needs to

 * I'm upstream. Are there any divergences by Debian that I should
   cherry pick?

 * I'm the maintainer. Are there any divergences which the upstream
   has merged which I can mark as undiverged?

A simple, single tag handles both of these cases. The first is
answered by selecting packages which have the tag which someone is the
upstream for. The second by removing the tag when the divergence goes
away by an upload to unstable (or a commit that will end up in
unstable soon.)

If it's desired to know when the divergence has been cherry picked but
an upload has not yet been made, fixed-upstream already handles this.

Don Armstrong

1: In the cases where a divergence introduces a bug, that's a bug in
its own right that should be tracked as we track all bugs.

2: Well, at least two major ones that I can see. If there are more,
someone should raise them so I know to think about them going forward.
"There's no problem so large it can't be solved by killing the user
off, deleting their files, closing their account and reporting their
REAL earnings to the IRS."
 -- The B.O.F.H..

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Reply to: