Overview

Request 1071028 accepted

Update to 3.5.2

Loading...

Dirk Stoecker's avatar

Patches should be tagged #PATCH-FIS-UPSTREAM , #PATCH-fiX-OPENSUSE with a comment. https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Patches_guidelines#Type_1:_minimal_single-line_comment_in_spec_file


c unix's avatar
author source maintainer target maintainer

Thanks for the comment.

My understanding of

https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Patches_guidelines#Type_2:_Complete_Information_provided_in_patch

is, that providing the info in the patch file is prefered.

Should i revoke/supersede this request?


Dirk Stoecker's avatar

I don't know who wrote that comment, but actually the one-line comment in the spec is much better. The comment in the patch file means that you have to open each file to check the state. The comment in the spec shows on first view what to do with the patch (i.e. UPSTREAM patches should be checked for removal on updates, SUSE patches need to be adapted instead). The comment in the patch allows a more detailed description thought (i.e. some patches contain the upstream submission mail text). In such cases I'd make a short one-liner and the longer comment in the patch.

Also the one-liners make web-based review much easier.

As for supersede: You're the maintainer - it's your decision.

P.S. If possibly also add a patch tagging for the other patches ;-)


Dirk Stoecker's avatar

Changed the Wiki a bit ;-)


c unix's avatar
author source maintainer target maintainer

Was nicht passt, wir passend gemacht ;)


c unix's avatar
author source maintainer target maintainer

Thanks for the explanation!

I'll add one-liners to the spec with next submit request. But for this time, if it is me to decide about the accept, i'll take this as is.

Request History
c unix's avatar

cunix created request

Update to 3.5.2


c unix's avatar

cunix accepted request

self accept

openSUSE Build Service is sponsored by