On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 16:38 -0400, Dylan Carlson wrote:
> On Tue October 12 2004 15:09, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > The proposal is to get infrastructure to provide a temporary location
> > for developers to upload patches which are necessary to be immediately
> > available to users.  This space would be writable by all CVS developers
> > and would be accessible to the world via http.  Developers would use
> > this space for temporary storage only for patches which are
> > created/rolled in-house.
> 
> Here here.  
> 
> Regardless of what we agree the pathname should be, it's a good idea.  
> 
> I'd also like to see a naming convention of patches established.   (crowd 
> moans: "not more red tape!")  OK, perhaps more of a guideline/best 
> practices than a requirement.   Right now I don't believe there is one... 
> is there?  It would be refreshing to look at that patch repository and see 
> clarity and consistency in naming, as that will be a large listing of 
> files.

I believe the current, albeit unwritten, rule is to name the patch as
${P}-name.patch just to make them easier to locate.  As for the large
listing, that is very doubtful, as this is just temporary holding until
the patches hit the distfiles mirrors.  No patch would survive longer
than 7 days in this "holding pen" before it would be removed in favor of
our distfiles mirrors.  This would also mean making tarballs out of all
patches, as vapier mentioned earlier, to keep there from being any
ASCII/Binary download problems.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Operations/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux