On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Colin Walters <walters <at> verbum.org> writes: > > The problem I'm trying to solve is when people collaboratively > > maintain a package, you want to know when e.g. updating to a new > > upstream version what the upstream status of patches are so you know > > whether to expect to see them in the new tarball. > > Why do you want to make this mandatory then? Some packages have only one > maintainer, some have multiple maintainers who have managed to handle this > issue just fine. In those cases, to help encourage people to file patches upstream. Also, even if a package has one maintainer now, it might have a different one a year from now. > It's fairly easy anyway to figure out whether a patch has already been applied > upstream: try building with the patch, if it fails with "patch reversed or > already applied" in the build.log, drop the patch, make force-tag, resubmit. That's a dangerous algorithm; a patch can still apply even if, for example, upstream committed a different fix for the same problem in a different area. Having a bug link there is going to help diagnose that. Really, it's one comment above the patch, and it's just a SHOULD. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
