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

Re: Backports service becoming official

Gerfried Fuchs <rhonda@deb.at> writes:

>  To me the solution is to see the person who does the backport as a part
> of the packaging team. There is the need for having a communication
> channel between the people anyway. Actually more and more packages are
> moved into team maintenance and I'm pretty puzzled about the strong
> objection on these grounds. And it would be very helpful for people that
> store the packages in VCSes to have the backport changes in a seperate
> branch so things won't get lost. It's IMHO the most natural thing to
> do.[1][2][3]

> [1] http://git.debian.org/?p=logcheck/logcheck.git;a=heads
> [2] http://git.debian.org/?p=users/jgoerzen/bacula;a=heads
> [3] http://git.deb.at/w/pkg/ejabberd.git/heads

If there's any complexity in the backport, that's probably true.  But I'll
note here that for all the backports I do for my packages, all the changes
in the backport are mechanical (and automated) and maintaining that in a
VCS is just more trouble than it's worth, so I don't bother.

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: