On Fri, 2007-05-10 at 11:40 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
Michael Wolf wrote:
I don't propose writing our own, of course. There's no need.
We even may start with osc - osc is based on svn and their authors could help us with accessing its svn functions.
As far as I can tell, osc is based on svn only insofar as its user interface for checking in packages is similar. I'm not averse to osc wrapping a proper revision control system (eg, osc diff, osc checkin, etc being based on their hg equivalents), but I am quite convinced that: a) We will sometimes want or need a way to drop down into lower-level and more powerful tools b) Something distributed is the way to go.
But to say that revision control doesn't work well for packages? I don't buy it.
It was my practical experience.
In December 2006 we branched ~280 packages to G:U to move packages to /usr.
I did a complete backup of all packages in the branch point.
G:U changed ~250 packages.
Factory changed ~30 packages.
There was ~30 packages with paralles changes.
In late January 2007 I went to merge both branches.
From those ~30 packages, ~20 was fixed by a simple merge and ~10 had to be merged manually.
The major problems of simple diff-patch-wiggle are:
- Upstream updated package and fixed the same problem in parallel. Added patch is rendered obsolete.
- Changes are in the same patch. Second level patch are often hard to apply (code change -> patch change -> second level patch cannot apply).
- Changes in spec preamble often conflict - upgrade changes patch sets, fix does it as well. You have to merge patch set as first in order.
Right. Well, conflicts are a fact of life, whether it comes to personal opinions or changes made to text files. :) Also we have plans to improve our .specs so that, among other things, it'll be obvious that a patch is expected to appear upstream and is therefore a candidate for removal. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org