Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (158 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] Package Markup / Package Tagging
  • From: Bernhard Walle <bernhard@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 14:22:23 +0200
  • Message-id: <4C838B7F.9000208@xxxxxxxxx>
Am 05.09.2010 14:13, schrieb Vincent Untz:

So you want to *duplicate* information just that the script can be kept
a bit simpler?

I'm not saying we should duplicate it -- that's the worst solution. I'm
just saying that, in my use case, both solution have ups and downs.

I agree there.

And you misread what I wrote since it's not "just" for a script. Having
the tags in the spec files does help me too. Daily.

I can imagine that, but forcing every developer to do something (which
is what a "policy" is doing) needs a bit more justification, IMO.

Normally opening a patch in my the editor (vim) is a matter of moving
the cursor to the name of the patch and typing "gf", going back is '%'.

And when you have 5 patches and you want to have a quick overview of all
of them, you open all files? :-) Having everything in the .spec file is
faster in this case.

If we would have an agreement about the name of the tags in the patches,
it wouldn't be difficult to write a command for osc that shows a nice
overview about all patches.


Imagine 50 patches (which is what we definitively have in some packages
in openSUSE or in SLES at least at the time I worked for the company
called Novell, so that's not a hypothetic scenario and no, I don't talk
about the kernel or Samba which have their own patch management
scripts). Then with the proposed 4 line tags that would be 250 lines of
code in the spec file.

I wouldn't call that "clear" but much more confusing than having the
patch description inside the patches and some scripts to get the overview.


Regards,
Bernhard

< Previous Next >