Re: Upcoming Fedora kernel workflow changes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Le mer. 15 avr. 2020 à 13:34, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 5:32 AM Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...

> > There is one thing I really dislike about the scheme (one it didn't
> > notice when I took a brief look at it weeks ago; sorry): There are no
> > individual patches anymore in dist-git/the srpm and that afaics violates
> > the packaging guidelines.
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_applying_patches
> >
> > ```
> > The files MUST then be checked into the Fedora Package revision control
> > system […]. Storing the files in this way allows people to use standard
> > tools to visualize the changes between revisions of the files and track
> > additions and removals without a layer of indirection […].
> > ```
> > There are other rules in the patch section that afaics are violated.
> > Were those violation discussed and blessed by the
> > Fedora Packaging Committee or FESCo?
>
> I don't think the split out patches "rule" is being violated here.
> They changed the source tarball to one generated from the git tree and
> they don't have any patches at the dist-git level at all.  Several
> other packages in Fedora already do this, such as anaconda.

So it means should one single line patch should be changed, you need
to re-upload a 100M tarball to the fedora lookaside cache?
I understand the benefit to have an upstream source tree as a primary
origin for kernel patch development. But what is the reason behind
this process in particular ?

It would have been easier to only generate a full fedora diff against
the original upstream tree (using a commit-id that can also be
generated with gitlab with A PR).
Like how I expect it's done with the patch-5.7.0-redhat.patch.

Then keep using the original upstream tarballs. (linux-M.tar.xz and
patch-M-m.xz)
I'm sure that in some cases, (minor patch update) there is even not
have to change the fedora diff.


-- 
-

Nicolas (kwizart)
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora General Discussion]     [Older Fedora Users Archive]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Coolkey]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [USB]     [Asterisk PBX]

  Powered by Linux