Tirsdag den 14. april 2009 13:34:20 skrev Tilman Schmidt:
Martin Schlander schrieb:
Mandag den 13. april 2009 23:25:47 skrev Tilman Schmidt:
When I started trying to help improving (Open)SUSE, the advice I got was that the best way to submit a patch was to open a Bugzilla entry describing the problem the patch was going to solve, and attach the proposed patch to it. Is that no longer true, and is it now acceptable to send personal mail to the packager of the package the file to be patched happens to be distributed in?
It's true if the patch is for openSUSE maintained code or packaging.
But if the patch is for upstream software, clearly the patch should be sent upstream and not to bnc.
AFAICT neither YaST (the software exposing the deficiency) nor hwinfo (the package containing the file that needs to be patched) are upstream software in that sense. But hwinfo doesn't seem to be openSUSE maintained either. So apparently there's a third category. How should that be handled?
If something is neither maintained by suse nor someone upstream, then I guess the only option left is that it's unmaintained. In that case I guess you have nowhere to send a patch until a new maintainer is found. Note that I do not know if this is true for hwinfo. Of course there are no rules without exceptions and it could happen that something was considered important enough to be patched by opensuse, but in general upstream is the place to go.
PS: What is "bnc"?
Bugzilla.novell.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-testing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-testing+help@opensuse.org