Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (102 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] Patches naming (include source version?)
Christian Boltz wrote:
Well, it depends ;-)

Yes. ;-)

Let's say you have a patch that fixes a bug in foo 1.2.4, and that bug
is also fixed upstream in the next (not yet available) release. In this
case, it makes sense to include the version number in the patch, for
example
foo-1.2.4-fix-crash.patch
so that you can easily spot "outdated" and no longer needed patches.

If there's a bug in foo 1.2.4 *and* you know for sure this is fixed in already
released foo 1.2.5 then it's ok to use the version number.

In all other cases the version number IMO does not even give a hint about
whether it's still needed or not. At least that's my experience when branching
a package for an upstream update.

IMO it does make much more sense to add a reference to a tracker ID for
pointing to a description of the issue fixed by the patch.

Another option is to have a comment line for each patch in the spec,

Even more nice. :-)

And a comment that a (back-port) patch is really obsolete when upgrading to
next upstream release would be perfect.

Independent on the naming scheme - a package with 2 patches will be easy
to maintain even if you have a "bugfix.patch" and "bugfix2.patch", and a
package with 100 patches will be a maintenance nightmare even if you
have self-explaining patch names ;-)

I totally agree here. I consider a package with more than a dozen patches to
be very questionable anyway because of the maintenance nightmare leading to
more small patches instead of proper upstream upgrading.

Ciao, Michael.

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups