Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in grimoires

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Flavien Bridault <vlaaad AT sourcemage.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in grimoires
  • Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 18:16:12 +0200

Le lundi 15 mai 2006 à 15:38 +0200, Andraž "ruskie" Levstik a écrit :
> With my recent work on smgb and smbsd I've found that we have a rather
> incosistent way of handling patches so I was doing some brainstorming on the
> issue(with input from others) and this is what I came up with:
>
> * a directory patches in the spell dir would hold ALL the patches
> * a format for patch filenames would be defined
> an example: 001-2-mypatch.diff
> arbitrary: SEQ-P-NAME.diff
> SEQ: sequential number from 000-999
> P: patchlevel
> NAME: a name for the patch
> That's for the filename
> * Comments in patches should be defined
> an example:
> ***START OF DIFF FILE***
> ## Description: What does this patch do
> ## BugUrl: Url to the upstream filed bug about the patch
> ## Type: [enh|fix|sec|other]
> THE_PATCH
> ***END OF DIFF FILE***

Is BugUrl really necessary ? I often make patch by myself when I upgrade
a spell, filling a bug for this is an extra work. Unless this might be
useful to future integration in stable/stable-rc ?
Could also this url points to an another bug managers than our bugzilla,
I mean those from other distros or projects ?

I would also propose to add the author of the patch. That could be
useful to give some credits to people who create patch, gurus, our
users, apprentices or developers from other projects ?

> * If possible ALL patches should be applied in PRE_BUILD
> * Sequential numbers have meaning:
> Patches that should be applied in PRE_BUILD go from 001 to 899
> Patches that can't be applied in PRE_BUILD go from 900 to 999
> 000 is reserved for now
> Other ranges might be added as well I doubt we will ever have 1000 patches
> in a spell
> * Final evolution of this would be automatic patching in PRE_BUILD using
> default_pre_build

I love this last proposal ;-) Adding PRE_BUILD files only to apply a
patch is quite annoying imho, and I think that's why we often find those
applying in BUILD which is not correct according to our handbook iirc.
--
Flavien Bridault

Disk, Graphics, Graphics-libs sections Guru
Source Mage GNU/Linux - http://www.sourcemage.org

irc: vlaaad
jabber: vlaaad AT amessage.be

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page