sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>
- To: Flavien Bridault <vlaaad AT sourcemage.org>
- Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells
- Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 09:59:32 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Flavien Bridault wrote:
> Le mardi 29 août 2006 à 07:53 -0500, David Kowis a écrit :
> Flavien Bridault wrote:
>>>> I tried to sum up all the discussion, but it is possible I forgot
>>>> something. Obviously, feel free to modify/comment, etc...
>>>>
>>>> [0] http://wiki.sourcemage.org/Grimoire_Patches
>
> # Upstream bug about the patch
>
> Not all patches will have upstream bugs. For example, the VDA patch for
> postfix doesn't have an upstream bug, because it's a feature patch. Is
> this upstream bug thing required? or is it just an extra field? I'm all
> for putting it in there if there really is an upstream bug, however, I'm
> not sure it should be required.
>
>> Don't you have an URL for that patch ? I think you can give this one :
>
>> http://web.onda.com.br/nadal/
>
>> It's not mandatory to be a bug URL imho, but at least a reference giving
>> enough informations.
>
That works, I like that solution. Although, that technically is just
part of the description.
So the description should contain:
* Where the patch came from
* Why the patch is being applied
* If it's a problem fixing patch, then the upstream bug URL, if any
- --
David Kowis
ISO Team Lead - www.sourcemage.org
Source Mage GNU/Linux
Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to
find easier ways to do something.
- Robert Heinlein
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)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=CR+/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
[SM-Discuss] Patches in spells,
Flavien Bridault, 08/28/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells, Andraž "ruskie" Levstik, 08/28/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 08/28/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells,
Flavien Bridault, 08/29/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells,
David Kowis, 08/29/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells,
Flavien Bridault, 08/29/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells, David Kowis, 08/29/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells,
Flavien Bridault, 08/29/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells,
David Kowis, 08/29/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Patches in spells,
Flavien Bridault, 08/29/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.