* Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Establishing Gentoo patch policy to keep our patches consistent and clean
@ 2013-04-07 6:53 99% ` Kacper Kowalik
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Kacper Kowalik @ 2013-04-07 6:53 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2284 bytes --]
On 06.04.2013 20:08, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As far as I'm aware, we don't really have much of a patch maintenance
> policy in Gentoo. There a few loose rules like «don't put awfully big
> files into FILESDIR» or the common sense «use unified diff», but no
> complete and clear policy.
>
> Especially considering the late discussion related to the needless
> and semi-broken functionality in epatch, I'd like to propose
> setting the following rules for patches in tree and in Gentoo-sourced
> patchsets:
>
> 1. Patches have to be either in unified or context diff format. Unified
> diff is preferred.
>
> 2. Patches have to apply to the top directory of the source tree with
> 'patch -p1'. If patches are applied to sub-directories, necessary '-p'
> argument shall be passed to 'epatch' explicitly. Developers are
> encouraged to create patches which are compatible with 'git am'.
>
> 3. Patches have to end with either '.patch' or '.diff' suffix.
>
> 4. If possible, patches shall be named in a way allowing them to be
> applied in lexical order. However, this one isn't necessary if patches
> from an older ebuild are applied to a newer one.
>
> 5. The patch name shall shortly summarize the changes done by it.
>
> 6. Patch files shall start with a brief description of what the patch
> does. Developers are encouraged to use git-style tags like 'Fixes:' to
> point to the relevant bug URIs.
>
> 7. Patch combining is discouraged. Developers shall prefer multiple
> patches following either the upstream commits or a logical commit
> sequence (if changes are not committed upstream).
>
> The above-listed policy will apply to the patches kept in the gx86 tree
> (in FILESDIRs) and patch archives created by Gentoo developers. They
> will not apply to the patch archives created upstream.
>
Hi,
there's at least one guideline written by the Ancient Ones that I know
[1] It roughly follows the ideas that you've described. I think it'd be
enough if people read it and used as a suggestion not a strict ruling.
Imposing things like lexical order or git-style heading is a bit too
much for me.
Do we really need rules for everything?
Cheers,
Kacper
[1] http://dev.gentoo.org/~vapier/clean-patches
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 901 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2013-04-06 18:08 [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Establishing Gentoo patch policy to keep our patches consistent and clean Michał Górny
2013-04-07 6:53 99% ` Kacper Kowalik
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox