2013/11/19 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx>: > Several packages are using git for patch management. eg: > > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/erlang.git/tree/erlang.spec#n46 > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/libguestfs.git/tree/libguestfs.spec?h=f20#n22 > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/qemu.git/tree/ > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ocaml.git/tree/ocaml.spec#n16 > > Some of these packages have invented home-brewed methods to generate > the Patch lines in the spec file, eg: I hope we'll see some progress in RPM in regards to VCS integrations soon. Because that's the main issue with RPM and related infrastructure nowadays. > More importantly, all are using random git repositories to store the > exploded tree. This makes it difficult for co-maintainers and proven > packagers to fit in with the patch management chosen by the > maintainer. Usually they won't have access to the git repository for > these patches, making it difficult to add patches and near impossible > to upgrade to a new version. I'm using https://git.fedorahosted.org/git/ for that. For example erlang is stored here: https://git.fedorahosted.org/git/erlang.git It contains a mirror of main upstream repo and few branches with Fedora-related patches. I think we should expand this practise (mirroring of a git-reposiories of upstream projects with a Fedora-specific patches) further and add more git mirrors here, at Fedorahosted. I personally love to see fedora kernel as a Git-managed tree instead of few dozens of random patches and a spec-file. -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
