On 6/6/07, Christopher Blizzard <blizzard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 10:31 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: > > Right. I really don't think we want to just take our current system, > switch out CVS, and end up with all of the same workflows. The change > should be more about how do we improve workflows. That means thinking > about things like: > * How do we make it easier for a maintainer to rebase their package to > a > newer upstream? > * How do we make it easier for a maintainer to develop, test, and > create > a patch to fix a problem that's being experienced in Fedora? > * How do we make it easy to send these patches to the upstream of the > project being worked on? > * How do we enable downstreams to take our bits, track them and make > changes as they need/want? > * How do we better enable a user who has a problem with something we > ship to be able to fix it themselves and get the fix back to us?
stuff snipped.
o Do we want to move to a process where code is just in a repo and it's built automatically instead of source + patches + spec file?
I am on fumes as I said.. but I do not see how the last 2 points above from Jeremy can be done with this one. Do you have an idea or is this something that is blindingly obvious? Thanks. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"
