Russ Allbery wrote: > I understand that you and a few other DDs feel that way, but you appear to > be outnumbered at the moment. By whom? IIRC I've heard both release team and security team members state they prefer dealing with packages that don't use those things, and a majority of packages don't use them. (1698 packages build-depend on dpatch, 905 on quilt, 2767 on dbs, and 10793 don't.) > Personally, I much prefer to work on > packages where I'm not the maintainer if they use quilt and/or dpatch; it > makes me far more comfortable than dealing with the giant wad of patch > approach. Personally, when I was doing security work, if the package used those systems it either wasted my time and didn't get a security fix as quickly as possible, or got a non-ideal NMU that ignored it. Ditto for release work, RC bug squashing, and other frequent NMU work. > > Best practice is to use a proper revision control system (one which can > > do patch stack management if that's desired) and generate a consolidated > > .dsc/.diff.gz for people who don't want to get to grips with it. > > It may be that this will be what finally gets us away from using such > tools, but I'm not sure how long it will take. 3714 source packages have Vcs-* fields, that's more already than those build-depending on quilt and dbs combined. (Ignoring the small number of cases that use both version control and quilt.) > I'm happy to support going in that direction, but I think we'll need to be > realistic about how long it will take to move the whole project. quilt > and dpatch have been building momentum for quite a while now, taking over > from the wad-of-patch approach, and any replacement will take at least as > long (and probably longer if its not VCS-agnostic). My guess is packages with Vcs- fields will surpass packages using all 3 patch systems in the next 3 to 4 months. dpkg has only supported these fields since September. Many larger projects like pkg-perl and d-i have added the field to hundreds of their packages in version control and just haven't gotten around to uploading all of those packages yet. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature