Re: Upstream source handling
On Tue, 2015-09-08 at 22:52 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Please take a look and let me know what you think about this variant.
> Most likely I've forgotten something, but I don't know what it is.
I had a (very brief) play.
The submodules refer to local paths (../source/linux IIRC) rather than
URLs on alioth, is that on purpose? Or is it to avoid cloning the full
linux history for each submodule? (i.e. git doesn't realise they are
the same remote repo and can share stuff, so it would clone the full
history multiple times)
Also genorig seems to be broken (wants the dfsg series). I suspect this
now works completely differently?
Manually merging into all derived featuresets when changing the base
(==none) featureset sounds annoying, and liable to being forgotten, but
I guess that is pretty hard to automate?
Would it be possible to arrange for the base featureset to actually be
in the main tree at the toplevel rather than as a submodule do you
think? That at least would seem to be a far more natural arrangement.
Ian.
Reply to: