Quoting Evan Broder ([email protected]): > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Bryce Harrington <[email protected]> wrote: > > Basically the items all need forwarded upstream and/or wrapped up in > > debian packaging properly. I'd only display them if the item includes > > debdiff (or has a branch merge proposal that includes a debian/changelog > > entry, if that can be detected). Needless to say, the add_quickless > > procedures should be amended to include a packaging step (for which I'm > > sure you know of a suitable doc.) > > This is something of a separate discussion, and I don't think it > applies specifically to the quicklist items since they have other > issues, but I did want to address it since you brought it up. > > We should encourage good habits like writing changelogs and quilt > patches, but we shouldn't do it at the cost of accepting the > contribution at all. It's easy for a sponsor (who's obviously an > experienced Ubuntu developer in their own right) to spend the 60 > seconds it takes to reformat the patches themselves, and it refocuses > the discussion on the actual content of the change instead of the > nitpicky details around our packaging processes. The only reason I can > think of not to do this is if you can't come up with the necessary > provenance information for the quilt header on your own. > > When we see bare patches in the queue, we should be willing to > quilt-ify them, add a changelog, and upload, then point the > contributor at the docs so they can do it themselves next time. I > usually use > http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/udd-patchsys.html#develop-your-patch > and > http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/debian-dir-overview.html#the-changelog
I'd have no problem with this at all. I've agonized over what to do in this case myself. I've chosen to ask the contributor whether they preferred re-doing it themselves, or just wanted us to take care of the patch. I didn't want to 'cheat' them out of the experience of doing it all themselves by just leaping in there and doing it. But at the same time if they *did* want to just dump the patch and move on, then I'm just annoying them. Would it be better to just make the changes, submit them (in my case, as I likely don't have upload rights, do a new merge request in place of theirs), and explain to them for next time what to do? Even as I type this I keep going back and forth between thinking the contributor would hate that or would prefer that. thanks, -serge -- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
