[opensuse-kde] Fwd: Re: [opensuse-factory] the next staging project: giflib5
KDE team, please review this thread. His point is: The packages he fixed did not have any patch tagging, therefore he shouldn't be forced to add them. And that's what we normally do - and I haven't seen any other policy from the KDE team that you want to enforce patch tagging going forward, Andreas ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: [opensuse-factory] the next staging project: giflib5 Date: Wednesday, March 13, 2013, 16:57:11 From: Stefan Seyfried <stefan.seyfried@googlemail.com> To: opensuse-factory@opensuse.org Am 13.03.2013 16:43, schrieb Claudio Freire:
Why not reopen the SR with "Sorry, no time to do that, feel free to tag after accepting" or something like that? Then the maintainer on the receiving end can decide whether it's worth the effort.
Just look for yourself, its requests 158804 and 158805. -- Stefan Seyfried "If your lighter runs out of fluid or flint and stops making fire, and you can't be bothered to figure out about lighter fluid or flint, that is not Zippo's fault." -- bkw -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org ----------------------------------------- -- Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg) GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kde+owner@opensuse.org
Hi, On Wednesday 13 March 2013 17:09:12 Andreas Jaeger wrote:
KDE team, please review this thread.
His point is: The packages he fixed did not have any patch tagging, therefore he shouldn't be forced to add them.
And that's what we normally do - and I haven't seen any other policy from the KDE team that you want to enforce patch tagging going forward,
This was discussed privately. There are more important issues with these two SR, one of these being that they break the backward compatibility with giflib4 (the others being poor coding style and an ifdef that doesn't exist in giflib <= 4.1.6) About the patch tagging, it's never too late to begin doing things properly. The KDE packages have countless patches that were pushed years ago, were never upstreamed and are potentially pointless nowadays. Christophe
In data mercoledì 13 marzo 2013 17:58:00, Christophe Giboudeaux ha scritto:
About the patch tagging, it's never too late to begin doing things properly. The KDE packages have countless patches that were pushed years ago, were never upstreamed and are potentially pointless nowadays.
I second Cristophe's opinion. As a person working mostly in upstream KDE, I pushed where possible to upstream patches or work directly in upstream's source repository when putting in fixes that weren't openSUSE-specific. An approach that worked nicely in 4.10's release cycle (udisks2 backend, build system fixes, Plasma theming fixes the most important). For a good part of the KDE team this is the de facto "modus operandi" now, which is much better than keeping such patches only in openSUSE. – Luca Beltrame - KDE Forums team KDE Science supporter GPG key ID: 6E1A4E79
On Wednesday 13 Mar 2013 18:11:16 Luca Beltrame wrote:
In data mercoledì 13 marzo 2013 17:58:00, Christophe Giboudeaux ha scritto:
About the patch tagging, it's never too late to begin doing things properly. The KDE packages have countless patches that were pushed years ago, were never upstreamed and are potentially pointless nowadays.
I second Cristophe's opinion. As a person working mostly in upstream KDE, I pushed where possible to upstream patches or work directly in upstream's source repository when putting in fixes that weren't openSUSE-specific. An approach that worked nicely in 4.10's release cycle (udisks2 backend, build system fixes, Plasma theming fixes the most important).
For a good part of the KDE team this is the de facto "modus operandi" now, which is much better than keeping such patches only in openSUSE.
Please note that I wanted the user to add a patch tag only to his newly added patch (not all of the old ones!) -> maybe there was some misunderstanding there... Adding patch tags to old patches is the KDE-Maintainers' task. Other than that, you know my opinion which is in line with Christophe and Luca. Nico -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kde+owner@opensuse.org
On 03/13/2013 06:11 PM, Luca Beltrame wrote:
In data mercoledì 13 marzo 2013 17:58:00, Christophe Giboudeaux ha scritto:
About the patch tagging, it's never too late to begin doing things properly. The KDE packages have countless patches that were pushed years ago, were never upstreamed and are potentially pointless nowadays.
I second Cristophe's opinion. As a person working mostly in upstream KDE, I pushed where possible to upstream patches or work directly in upstream's source repository when putting in fixes that weren't openSUSE-specific. An approach that worked nicely in 4.10's release cycle (udisks2 backend, build system fixes, Plasma theming fixes the most important).
For a good part of the KDE team this is the de facto "modus operandi" now, which is much better than keeping such patches only in openSUSE.
If this all is the opinion of the KDE team, then I suggest that you communicate it properly. Should the review team follow the same standard and enforce patch taglines for all new KDE patches? Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg) GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kde+owner@opensuse.org
participants (4)
-
Andreas Jaeger -
Christophe Giboudeaux -
Luca Beltrame -
Nico Kruber