Re: Patch format (was: [med-svn] r1888 - in trunk/packages/glam2/trunk/debian: . patches)
On Sun, 18 May 2008, David Paleino wrote:
On Sun, 18 May 2008 10:22:16 +0000, plessy@alioth.debian.org wrote:
--- trunk/packages/glam2/trunk/debian/patches/CFLAGS-support.patch
+++ trunk/packages/glam2/trunk/debian/patches/CFLAGS-support.patch
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
Description: Introduces support for the CFLAGS variables in glam2's
Makefiles, so that the Debian building system can modify the optimisation
levels.
The lines belonging to the field description should be indented according
to RFC 822 (as Debian control files).
Author: Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>
-Forwared: Not yet
+Forwared: Mon, 19 May 2008 04:01:11 +0900
--- a/purge/Makefile
+++ b/purge/Makefile
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
Charles, I'm not a DD, so I'm asking to you (and Andreas, and Nelson, and $DD)
to do a proposal on -devel :)
You ask what?? Well, We could perfectly do this, but why do you assume that
only DDs can issue proposals????
Can we standardize the patch header? Be it quilt, dpatch, $foo, the header
might be something like:
Author:
Forwarded:
Description:
I'm currently starting to use this format:
Author: Foo Bar <foo@bar.com>
Forwarded: no | http://$url_of_upstream_BTS_with_patch
Reason: foo
another line
.
Another paragraph
So try rather:
Reason: foo
another line
.
Another paragraph
Do you (all) believe that would be a good idea? :)
I don't care whether _all_ people believe something. I'd regard it very
reasonable and those people who think so as well should just start adopting
this habit.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: