On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 02:19:38PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Thank you all for your thoughtful consideration.
- be able to easily rebase/refresh a patch
- be able to easily verify a repository consistency
- be useful with generic protocols (e.g. http, rsync)
- be script-able (for local customization, for integration with
rpmbuild, ...)
wishes (but not requirements):
- be able to make (and verify) a signed commit/tag
- be able to keep track of details about patches (author, committer,
some special marks (e.g. "signed-of-by", "reviewed-by", ...)
- be able to generate statistics about patches (diffstat)
- be able to generate change logs
- be able to generate patches (to avoid unwanted "creativity", it'd
be nice to use same format for all Fedora patches)
BTW, do we already know if we want to maintain source code (= git,
hg, ...) or patches files (= StGit, Quilt)? I think that maintain
patch files by a classic SCM is very insane.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
