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

Re: RFC round 5: DEP-3: Patch Tagging Guidelines

Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> writes:

> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 7:53 AM, Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@madism.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 10:30:14PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >> Anyway, I'd rather wait some time until people have tried using
> >> this format before deciding if we must make some special case due
> >> to git format-patch.
> >
> > It's not a special case. Kernel people, git people, gnome people,
> > X.org people, all can cherry-pick patches and format-patch them
> > away. […]

That's because those projects are in the special case of also using Git.
Despite its popularity, Git is far from the only DVCS in common use.

> What format do the other DVCS systems use for patch export?

Bazaar users generate a “merge directive” for serialising a change set
<URL:http://bazaar-vcs.org/MergeDirective>. The merge directive is
metadata to be read by the ‘bzr merge’ command; it is commonly
accompanied in the same message by a plain-text ‘bzr diff’ output.

> Also, the git format-patch command can include encoded binary files,
> which I don't think patch(1) can handle.

Right, all these serialisations are essentially supersets of what
‘patch(1)’ can do, since they include things like removing files etc.

 \        “We should be less concerned about adding years to life, and |
  `\         more about adding life to years.” —Arthur C. Clarke, 2001 |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

Reply to: