Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (116 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] uncertainties about patch packaging

On Monday 2013-05-06 12:44, Adam Spiers wrote:
It's also unclear how I should add a line

# PATCH-FIX-OPENSUSE fix-for-opensuse-specific-things.patch bnc#123456

when there is no bnc entry.

There is not much else besides leaving out the bnc# you could do.

Like I said, the alternative is to explicitly require a bugzilla entry
should be filed if one doesn't already exist. So you are saying that
it is better to leave out the bnc# ? Or are there some circumstances
in which it is better to file a bnc?

Patches come and go like socks. Nobody really wants a bugzilla
entry for each and every one. Especially since Firefox is so slow
on Atom-class..


A guideline for package maintainers, who choose to make a policy out of
it for other submitters :)

In that case the page should say something like:

This page gives guidelines for managing the life cycle of patches
to packages. Each project/package maintainer is free to adopt
their own policy regarding how strictly they require submissions
to adhere to these guidelines, so non-conforming submitrequests
will be tolerated to different degrees based on the context.

Is that OK?

Yes, that essentially reflects what is being practiced.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >