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

Re: [RFC] Proposal for new source format

Hello Helmut,

On Mon 28 Oct 2019 at 09:35PM +01, Helmut Grohne wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 10:11:22AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> On Sat 26 Oct 2019 at 04:24PM -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> > Hm, that's an interesting thought.  I do generally include that sort of
>> > information in the docuemntation of all packages for which I'm upstream,
>> > but for Debian I've assumed the preferred way to propose changes is the
>> > BTS.  Now that's potentially changing with Salsa.  I don't really mind
>> > monitoring multiple input formats, but some people will.
>> I think that README.source is a fine place for this sort of information.
> Hell, no!
> Having to read some arbitrary README.source slows down patch submission
> excessively. You may consider this cost low, but if you try to file
> thousands of patches across the whole archive, this adds up. Documenting
> the preferred way of change submission in a machine-readable format
> absolutely is a requirement for performing archive-wide changes. Our
> present implementation of this requirement is "maintainers must consume
> bugs filed via the BTS". I think this is less than ideal, but works
> reasonably well from a submitter-pov.  Changing this to "look up in
> README.source" would make me stop contributing to Debian.

Sorry, I didn't phrase my suggestion carefully.  I was assuming that we
will continue to expect maintainers to accept patches in the BTS, but
that if they *prefer* something else, they could document that in

Someone making a large number of changes could just choose to submit
them all as patches to the BTS, due to the high cost of checking
README.source -- I'm sure maintainers would understand this.

Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: