Christoph Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > - Consider using "dpatch" for changing the upstream sources. >> > You may find it easier to keep or remove patches when the next >> > upstream version is released. >> >> It's good to know the option, but for minor changes that are likely to >> either be kept or accepted upstream, I've found it easier to use the >> original patch. I don't think you (Christoph) wanted to require it - >> otherwise you wouldn't have uploaded the package - but for the casual >> reader, it could be even clearer that this is a matter of preference and >> consideration on a case by case basis. > > In case I accidentally sounded like I wanted to enforce anything: that was > just a hint for Al since many (new) maintainers don't know dpatch and > happily patch around the upstream's source and sometimes start to get lost > in it. In such a (rather simple) package it doesn't make much of a > difference.
There are also other alternatives to dpatch; one is Debian-specific and i keep forgetting its name, and there's quilt. The main advantage of quilt IMHO is that it doesn't duplicate the whole tree when editing and updating the patch, which can be time- and disk-consuming in large projects. Instead it keeps a list of files for the patch one is editing and only keeps copies of these. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX)
