On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 08:14:43PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:12:15AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > What I need as someone working on a package for which I'm not the
> > maintainer is this:
> >
> > dpkg-source -x must give me something I can immediately edit and diff
> In every single patch system I've encountered, you can run debian/rules
> patch and get the patched source. It's only one more command and I consider
> it universal for all patch systems deployed in Debian.
In some cases, this will fail if you don't have the build-dependencies
installed.
--
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:12:15AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> What I need as someone working on a package for which I'm not the
> maintainer is this:
>
> dpkg-source -x must give me something I can immediately edit and diff
> on the resulting tree after I've edited and built it must produce a
> s
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 06:53:08AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> > Note that there are ways of dealing with the situation you describe
> > above which don't break the standard model. For example, you could have
> > the .diff.gz specify the _patched_ s
Le mercredi 09 août 2006 à 11:12 +0100, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> Did you read the contortions in my previous posting ? Obviously I
> know how to use diff. The problem is that with patch systems I
> _can't_ just apply my universal knowledge about dpkg-source and diff
> and so forth. I have to lear
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Centralized darcs"):
>> In my experience, the key difference between whether or not I want to
>> use a patch system like quilt is whether I have an upstream to which I
>> need to feed self-co
Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Centralized darcs"):
> In my experience, the key difference between whether or not I want to use
> a patch system like quilt is whether I have an upstream to which I need to
> feed self-contained patches that may go unapplied for extended periods of
&
Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Centralized darcs"):
> Maybe you shouldn't assume all people who like to code and debug aren't
> clueful enough to run diff. Putting my changes in a patch is the most
> useful way to integrate them in a Debian package *and* to forward th
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think this is the root of the key difference between the `like patch
> systems' people and the `hate patch systems' people.
>
> `Hate patch systems' people are those who can read code, and prefer
> programming and debuggint to doing archaelogy.
Oh brothe
I demand that Matthew Palmer may or may not have written...
> On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 01:52:09PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
>> I demand that Matthew Palmer may or may not have written...
>>> I've given up on this thread, but I just have to say one thing:
>>> On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 11:38:39AM +0300
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 01:52:09PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Matthew Palmer may or may not have written...
>
> > I've given up on this thread, but I just have to say one thing:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 11:38:39AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> >> `Hate patch systems' can easi
* Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> * John Goerzen wrote:
> > Darcs has a nice way of pushing patches via e-mail, with GPG
> > signatures even.
>
> That's the only feature I miss after I switched from darcs to
> mercurial.
I just realized that this feature is implemented in the patchbomb
extension, whi
I demand that Matthew Palmer may or may not have written...
> I've given up on this thread, but I just have to say one thing:
> On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 11:38:39AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
>> `Hate patch systems' can easily apply all chunks and start
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
> Easily. Heh.
On 06/08/06, Norbert Tretkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* John Goerzen wrote:
> Darcs has a nice way of pushing patches via e-mail, with GPG
> signatures even.
That's the only feature I miss after I switched from darcs to
mercurial.
Norbert
At last someone mentions mercuria
* John Goerzen wrote:
> Darcs has a nice way of pushing patches via e-mail, with GPG
> signatures even.
That's the only feature I miss after I switched from darcs to
mercurial.
Norbert
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Conta
On Saturday 05 August 2006 18:52, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 11:38:39AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > In my opinon the root of the key differences is that with patch systems
> > you can have it both ways:
> > a) all chunks in one big diff
> > b) chunks clearly separated by issu
On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 11:38:39AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> In my opinon the root of the key differences is that with patch systems you
> can have it both ways:
> a) all chunks in one big diff
> b) chunks clearly separated by issue
> Obviously the patch system is an addition to the VCS, so
Le vendredi 04 août 2006 à 12:58 +0100, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> `Hate patch systems' people are those who can read code, and prefer
> programming and debuggint to doing archaelogy. They're people like
> me: my first approach to any bug I'm trying to fix (or change I'm
> trying to make) is to read
I've given up on this thread, but I just have to say one thing:
On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 11:38:39AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> `Hate patch systems' can easily apply all chunks and start
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Easily. Heh. You should be a comedian.
- Matt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [
On Friday 04 August 2006 14:58, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Matthew Palmer writes ("Re: Centralized darcs"):
> > diff.gz archaeology should not be necessary.
>
> I think this is the root of the key difference between the `like patch
> systems' people and the `hate pat
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> After every upstream merger, I have to review every patch applied to the
> package *anyway* to make sure that it's still sane, and I find that easier
> to do by reading through the contents of debian/patches than by running
> filterdiff on diff.gz and the
Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> After every upstream merger, I have to review every patch applied to
>> the package *anyway* to make sure that it's still sane, and I find that
>> easier to do by reading through the contents of debian/patche
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think this is the root of the key difference between the `like patch
> systems' people and the `hate patch systems' people.
In my experience, the key difference between whether or not I want to use
a patch system like quilt is whether I have an upstream
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:23:43AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.03.1116 +0100]:
> > Debian's lists support List-ID, List-Post, and the other List- headers.
> > If mutt's L command doesn't use that to figure out the list reply
> > address, p
Matthew Palmer writes ("Re: Centralized darcs"):
> diff.gz archaeology should not be necessary.
I think this is the root of the key difference between the `like patch
systems' people and the `hate patch systems' people.
`Hate patch systems' people are those w
Romain Francoise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> A few years ago, we had only CVS, which sucked. And now, we have a
>> gazillion of different VCSes, all different.
>
> And most of them suck too, in their own ways.
Yup... and you just _know_ whichever one ends up "winning" will not be
the best by mo
Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A few years ago, we had only CVS, which sucked. And now, we have a
> gazillion of different VCSes, all different.
And most of them suck too, in their own ways.
--
,''`.
: :' :Romain Francoise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
`. `' http://people.de
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 15:41:32 +0100, Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>At 1154593998 past the epoch, Eduard Bloch wrote:
>> And you can do all that with dpatch-edit-dpatch and the
>> regular Unix commands without learning another VCS and/or
>> without needing access to it. Advantage? Yes.
>
>So
#include
* John Goerzen [Thu, Aug 03 2006, 08:29:33AM]:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:37:10AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > #include
> > * John Goerzen [Wed, Aug 02 2006, 04:12:50PM]:
> >
> > > Because everyone knows how to use cp and diff, and because I get diffs
> > > sent to the BTS all the t
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 01:27:45PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> My point was that having to tell mutt manually about every mailing list
> is a pain, and people don't do it.
I do.
> The List- headers are sufficient, in my experience, to automate this.
They don't support following up to cross-po
At 1154593998 past the epoch, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> And you can do all that with dpatch-edit-dpatch and the
> regular Unix commands without learning another VCS and/or
> without needing access to it. Advantage? Yes.
Someone is more likely to know a particular VCS than an
in-house tool like dpatch,
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:32:28AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:09:44AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Well if someone has to work on a "which of the applied patch broken
> > the package is such a way" kinda issue, he will have to, in order to
> > have access to the patche
At 1154609291 past the epoch, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) wrote:
I use something similar, but I generate procmailrc and
muttrc snippets from a master file of mailing lists using m4
and some scripts.
--
Jon Dowland
http://alcopop.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject o
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Alexander Sack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Anyway, as a side note on this thread: *darcs is just far t
>>> slow* for decent maintenance of large pieces of software. I tried once
>>> to create a mo
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 09:15:05AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> The very same "debian patch manager" clearly identifies patches you've
> produced against a certain upstream version and if I want to see the text of
> your diffs altering src/file.c|h|whatever, not just a mere changelog entry, I
Alle Thursday 03 August 2006 13:42, Otavio Salvador ha scritto:
> Alexander Sack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Anyway, as a side note on this thread: *darcs is just far t
> > slow* for decent maintenance of large pieces of software. I tried once
> > to create a mozilla repository, do some
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:13:30PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Alexander Sack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> Anyway, as a side note on this thread: *darcs is just far t
> >> slow* for decent maintenance of large pieces of software. I trie
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:09:44AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> Well if someone has to work on a "which of the applied patch broken
> the package is such a way" kinda issue, he will have to, in order to
> have access to the patches.
No, they are all in the diff.gz, and that's easy enough to find.
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:37:10AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * John Goerzen [Wed, Aug 02 2006, 04:12:50PM]:
>
> > Because everyone knows how to use cp and diff, and because I get diffs
> > sent to the BTS all the time. It works. And it has nothing to do with
> > VCS -- it's just D
Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexander Sack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Anyway, as a side note on this thread: *darcs is just far t
>> slow* for decent maintenance of large pieces of software. I tried once
>> to create a mozilla repository, do some work with it and it was
Alexander Sack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anyway, as a side note on this thread: *darcs is just far t
> slow* for decent maintenance of large pieces of software. I tried once
> to create a mozilla repository, do some work with it and it was completely
> unusable. I am not talking about minu
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:09:44AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> >
> > Nobody has to learn Darcs to hack on my packages.
>
> Well if someone has to work on a "which of the applied patch broken
> the package is such a way" kinda issue, he will have to, in order to
> have access to the patches.
> dpa
Lars Wirzenius:
> to, 2006-08-03 kello 11:23 +0100, martin f krafft kirjoitti:
>> It sure works, but you have to let mutt know about it:
>> subscribe debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>> That's a *good* thing.
> My point was that having to tell mutt manually about every mailing
> list is a pain,
On Thursday 03 August 2006 12:23, martin f krafft took the opportunity to say:
> also sprach Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.03.1116 +0100]:
> > Debian's lists support List-ID, List-Post, and the other List- headers.
> > If mutt's L command doesn't use that to figure out the list reply
to, 2006-08-03 kello 11:23 +0100, martin f krafft kirjoitti:
> also sprach Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.03.1116 +0100]:
> > Debian's lists support List-ID, List-Post, and the other List- headers.
> > If mutt's L command doesn't use that to figure out the list reply
> > address, perha
also sprach Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.03.1116 +0100]:
> Debian's lists support List-ID, List-Post, and the other List- headers.
> If mutt's L command doesn't use that to figure out the list reply
> address, perhaps someone would be so kind as to write a suitable patch?
>
> (That'
to, 2006-08-03 kello 17:56 +0900, Miles Bader kirjoitti:
> Er, well the advantage of the headers is that in practice they pretty
> much work most of the time (despite being "non-standard" and "not
> generally implemented" they seem to work with the sort of MUA dds tend
> to use), unlike the c-o-c,
Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So you're shouting to people to use non-standard and not generally
> implemented headers to in order to have you comply with the mailinglist
> code of conduct?
Er, well the advantage of the headers is that in practice they pretty
much work most of the
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 03:34:34PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 09:09:12PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > Care to describe how without using your SCM but apt-get source instead ?
> apt-get source packagename
> Really, what is the problem here?
With a system like dpatch
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 06:31:18PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I think people that are NMUing packages rarely care about this.
>>
>> When NMU'ing a package, I'd really appreciate to know which changes have
On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 15:34 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
>
> > Ok, third time. Please do not do that:
> > To: George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
> Then SET YOUR HEADERS to reflect that, like everyone else does.
So you're shouting to people to use non-standa
#include
* John Goerzen [Wed, Aug 02 2006, 04:12:50PM]:
> Because everyone knows how to use cp and diff, and because I get diffs
> sent to the BTS all the time. It works. And it has nothing to do with
> VCS -- it's just Debian packages.
Bingo. Therefore, your efforts to use the regular process
#include
* Matthew Palmer [Thu, Aug 03 2006, 08:03:21AM]:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:36:18PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > #include
> > * John Goerzen [Wed, Aug 02 2006, 01:01:51PM]:
> > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:47:01PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > > > to learn how we deal with this
On Thursday 03 August 2006 03:32, Matthew Palmer wrote:
--cut--
> > > > This is fine, but (again) you forget about your 'apt-get source'
> > > > users, which are not supposed to be aware of your SCM, where your
> > > > repo is,
> >
> > please, find 'SCM' in the above row, thanks.
>
> I did. Using
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 04:16:30PM -0500, John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:31:29PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > > Really, I think that getting patches in darcs from people that are using
> > > "darcs send" is not only easier for me as a maintainer, but also ea
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 02:08:00AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> On Thursday 03 August 2006 00:45, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:47:01PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 02 August 2006 20:11, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > > > Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writ
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 12:28:35AM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> On Thursday 03 August 2006 00:11, Josselin Mouette took the opportunity to
> say:
> > Le mercredi 02 août 2006 à 15:34 -0500, John Goerzen a écrit :
> > > > Ok, third time. Please do not do that:
> > > > To: George Danchev <[EMAIL
On Thursday 03 August 2006 00:45, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:47:01PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > On Wednesday 02 August 2006 20:11, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > > Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >>> > But yo
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:36:18PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * John Goerzen [Wed, Aug 02 2006, 01:01:51PM]:
> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:47:01PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > > to learn how we deal with this all.
> > >
> > > This is fine, but (again) you forget about your 'ap
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:47:01PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 August 2006 20:11, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>> > But you lose debian specific patches to be clearly separated from the
>
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 06:54:51PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 August 2006 18:35, John Goerzen wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 06:01:27PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > > > How is that not true if one knows a given patch system and does know
> > > > > about your VCS and ne
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 06:31:18PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think people that are NMUing packages rarely care about this.
>
> When NMU'ing a package, I'd really appreciate to know which changes have
> which purpose and which "specificity". In part
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 06:01:27PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 August 2006 17:31, John Goerzen wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 05:20:26PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > debian/patches/ as separate file, how do I know how to update/remove/etc
> >
> > There would be no debia
On Thursday 03 August 2006 00:11, Josselin Mouette took the opportunity to
say:
> Le mercredi 02 août 2006 à 15:34 -0500, John Goerzen a écrit :
> > > Ok, third time. Please do not do that:
> > > To: George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> >
> > Then SET YOUR H
Le mercredi 02 août 2006 à 15:34 -0500, John Goerzen a écrit :
> > Ok, third time. Please do not do that:
> > To: George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
> Then SET YOUR HEADERS to reflect that, like everyone else does.
Which headers?
(If you are talking about
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 11:04:53AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > I agree, dpatch & co seem to be more accessible: they are files you
> > can "touch"; they're not an abstract concept ("branch") which you
> > can work with, but which is not tangible.
> This is another possible reason for SVN's s
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:31:29PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > Really, I think that getting patches in darcs from people that are using
> > "darcs send" is not only easier for me as a maintainer, but also easier
>
> Much easier as storing the mail attachment under debian/patches? I doubt.
Yes,
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:36:18PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > NO. They need not care. They can just hack and send me diffs. My
> > debian/changelog will already document what has been going on anyway.
>
> Heh. So they need two copies, one where they do modifications, then diff
> those and s
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 09:09:12PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 August 2006 21:01, John Goerzen wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:47:01PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > > to learn how we deal with this all.
>
> Ok, third time. Please do not do that:
> To: George Danchev <
#include
* John Goerzen [Wed, Aug 02 2006, 01:01:51PM]:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:47:01PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > to learn how we deal with this all.
> >
> > This is fine, but (again) you forget about your 'apt-get source' users,
> > which
>
> NO. They need not care. They can j
#include
* John Goerzen [Wed, Aug 02 2006, 08:27:32AM]:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 09:41:02AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > #include
> > * John Goerzen [Tue, Aug 01 2006, 04:47:13PM]:
> >
> > > I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> > > understand the whole cdbs/dpat
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 21:01, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:47:01PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > to learn how we deal with this all.
Ok, third time. Please do not do that:
To: George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Sending to debian-deve
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:47:01PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > to learn how we deal with this all.
>
> This is fine, but (again) you forget about your 'apt-get source' users, which
NO. They need not care. They can just hack and send me diffs. My
debian/changelog will already document wha
Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
> But you lose debian specific patches to be clearly separated from the
> upstrem source (digging diff.gz for that is not fun), unless one knows
>
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 20:11, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> > But you lose debian specific patches to be clearly separated from the
> >>> > upstrem source (digging diff.gz for that is not fun), unless one
>
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> > But you lose debian specific patches to be clearly separated from the
>>> > upstrem source (digging diff.gz for that is not fun), unless one knows
>>> > where to find
>>>
>>> First, what is a "Debian-speci
George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > But you lose debian specific patches to be clearly separated from the
>> > upstrem source (digging diff.gz for that is not fun), unless one knows
>> > where to find
>>
>> First, what is a "Debian-specific patch?" Isn't everything in diff.gz
>> that?
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 06:01:27PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
>> > > How is that not true if one knows a given patch system and does know
>> > > about your VCS and needs to work on one of your packages. Do they have
>> >
>> > They just apt-get source, ha
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 18:35, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 06:01:27PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > > How is that not true if one knows a given patch system and does know
> > > > about your VCS and needs to work on one of your packages. Do they
> > > > have
> > >
> > > Th
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 06:01:27PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > How is that not true if one knows a given patch system and does know
> > > about your VCS and needs to work on one of your packages. Do they have
> >
> > They just apt-get source, hack away, and send me a diff.
>
> Also true for
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 17:31, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 05:20:26PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > Actually, I disagree with that. I always hate having to work with a
> > > package that uses a patch management system, because then I have to
> > > learn the system before
Hello!
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:49:06 +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> The first time I generated the darcs -upstream repository, I didn't
> include the CVS folders (because anyway it's a lintian error if
^^^
> they're present i
Hello!
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:32:13 +0200, John Goerzen wrote:
> If upstream uses darcs or git, you could use their repo directly.
> If they use CVS or SVN, you could use tailor to track it. If they
> use Arch, you can use arch2darcs to track it.
For a tailor mini-HowTo, please give a look at [1
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 05:20:26PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > Actually, I disagree with that. I always hate having to work with a
> > package that uses a patch management system, because then I have to
> > learn the system before I can do any work on the package. And there are
> > several s
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 16:34, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 11:23:31AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 16:47 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> > > understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whateve
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 11:23:31AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 16:47 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> > understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack to
> > manage your patches when you c
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 10:17:57AM +0200, Christoph Haas wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 August 2006 23:47, John Goerzen wrote:
> > I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> > understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack to
> > manage your patches when you coul
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 09:41:02AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * John Goerzen [Tue, Aug 01 2006, 04:47:13PM]:
>
> > I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> > understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack to
> > manage your patches when y
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 12:23, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 16:47 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> > understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack to
> > manage your patches when you could us
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 16:47 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack to
> manage your patches when you could use a real VC tool that does it
> better?
A patch system can be ver
also sprach Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.02.1004 +0100]:
> > I agree, dpatch & co seem to be more accessible: they are files
> > you can "touch"; they're not an abstract concept ("branch")
> > which you can work with, but which is not tangible.
>
> This is another possible reason
Hello!
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 10:17:57 +0200, Christoph Haas wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 August 2006 23:47, John Goerzen wrote:
>> I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
>> understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack
>> to manage your patches when you could
Hello!
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 22:34:41 +0200, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 09:06:19PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
>> John, are you actually using the workflow you describe for
>> maintenance of Debian packages? Single or team maintenance? Could
>> you elaborate a bit?
>
> I do use
Le mardi 01 août 2006 à 23:39 +0100, martin f krafft a écrit :
> also sprach John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.01.2247 +0100]:
> > I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> > understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack to
> > manage your patch
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 23:47, John Goerzen wrote:
> I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack to
> manage your patches when you could use a real VC tool that does it
> better?
Is there a common "best pra
#include
* John Goerzen [Tue, Aug 01 2006, 04:47:13PM]:
> I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack to
> manage your patches when you could use a real VC tool that does it
> better?
Because you can make y
* John Goerzen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 06:12:34PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > > diff also doesn't preserve permissions, so some are using debian/rules
> > > anyway.
> >
> > Indeed but that can make thing broke due the wrong permission of
> > upstream files, iff y
also sprach John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.01.2247 +0100]:
> I do use darcs to track patches against upstream. I really don't
> understand the whole cdbs/dpatch/whatever thing -- why use a hack to
> manage your patches when you could use a real VC tool that does it
> better?
I agree, d
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 14:55 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 08:31:37PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > Right, bzr is great when you have a designed person to integrate
> > contributor's changes after review.
> >
> > But if you have a set of equal developers, bzr can be also us
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 06:12:34PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> > diff also doesn't preserve permissions, so some are using debian/rules
>> > anyway.
>>
>> Indeed but that can make thing broke due the wrong permission of
>> upstream files, iff you us
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
