On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 17:32 +0100, Michal Hrusecky wrote:
Michael Schroeder - 16:53 28.02.14 wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 04:44:29PM +0100, Michal Hrusecky wrote:
I just started helping review team with reviews and I'm running into people who instead of creating patches and documenting them just update and change tarball (without bumping the version) effectivelly hiding patches inside.
It is obviously wrong, [...]
Is it? How is updating a patch different?
Well, we have so many policies about tracking patches... If we allow people to simply change the content of the tarball (without version change) instead of doing real patch, it's pointless to track patches as we have no idea whether the tarball is upstream one or how many bundled patches it contains.
I fully agree with Michal here. It's about consistency and reproducibility. If a tarball 'changes' but versions stay, it's close to impossible to reproduce. There is, though, no policy in place to decline a replaced tarball, because: a Tarball normally is produced by an upstream (which, openSUSE Project at large might be the upstream of openSUSE Distribution). Any upstream that replaces a tarball with a different but equal name is to be publicly flamed and tortured. We're not thinking about playground here... It's my understanding that we're trying to make a solid distribution; The teams within the openSUSE Project that are actually producing some code shall please also take their roles serious. And properly work with the tools given (a great example, if I may, is the YaST-Team, who seems not to have any issues with this! So it IS possible.. it requires discipline though) Dominique -- Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar@opensuse.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org