Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-buildservice (339 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-buildservice] concept for osc handling merge requests
  • From: "Dr. Peter Poeml" <poeml@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:37:23 +0100
  • Message-id: <20080310133723.GS8818@xxxxxxx>
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 02:27:32PM +0100, Adrian Schröter wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2008 13:39:25 wrote Dr. Peter Poeml:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 01:32:03PM +0100, Adrian Schröter wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2008 13:28:46 wrote Dr. Peter Poeml:
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 01:25:23PM -0500, JP Rosevear wrote:
On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 12:37 +0100, Dr. Peter Poeml wrote:


How are multiple mergereq's for the same
package handled? (Maybe we should try to apply all the rdiffs?).

There is no plan for that. As far as I see, a second request could be
a) a new one from a previous submitter, or
b) from someone else, and another source package.

In a), the first request is probably obsoleted by the second one (if it
comes from the same source). Thus, it would be good from my perspective
of a packager to attach a "obsoletes XY" note. Or I could probably go
ahead and delete the request that I created earlier.

In b), the request recipient will probably choose one of the two
requests, or try to apply them subsequently.

In any case, the first submit could conflict with the other one. So it is
IMHO always better to accept them one after one to see, if it does still

As far as I understand the current draft of how the "apply" step is
going to be implemented, it _always_ applies. Because it is going to be
a simple copy, overwriting what's there, and not a diff which is

That is not the point, the point is that you may not WANT to merge the second
one, because it may not apply anymore. It is better that the upstream project
does fix it again instead of merge it also and have broken sources in the
target project.

I'm afraid, I can't understand this. Could you explain what you wrote in
a little more detail? What do you mean with "upstream project" and "fix
it again"?

If you followed the thread, you may note that I referred to the
proposition "try to apply all the rdiffs" -- which does not reflect the
planned implementation. What I tried to point out is that there is no
concept of a diff which can either apply, or not apply because it
doesn't 'fit' anymore. Do you have a different view?

"WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!"

SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
Research & Development
< Previous Next >
Follow Ups