[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: patch filenames
On 07/01/2008, at 23:21, Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
It is not as easy as you make it sound. Many, many times, putting
all the patches together and removing pkgsrc-specific bits will
result in a patch that will NOT be accepted by upstream. The
reason: the patch will contain fixes and/or improvements for many
different, unrelated stuff.
Amount af efforts for sorting patches into logical blocks is well
known. The question is WHEN these efforts are necessary. Every time
you change even one line in source code to keep your patches/ in a
consistent state? Or once before sending them to upstream maintainer.
I'd prefer to do this once.
Mmm, sorry? I don't understand you here.
Upstream wants patches
As an upstream maintainer I'd tell you that I personally DO NOT NEED
user's patches at all and in truth I don't like them. Most often all
these patches are not good enough to be applied for a number of
reasons. So, I personally prefer bug report when user describe his
problem and nothing else. It is enough and I always tell
them "thank you".
Maybe you don't. But I've had lots of patches integrated verbatim
into mainstream sources. Providing good patches is a good, if not
the best, way to gain confidence from the maintainers, and this can
later make you get commit access. You cannot gain such confidence
from explanations alone: you can describe things very well at a
theoretical level but be a poor programmer.
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84%gmail.com@localhost>
Main Index |
Thread Index |