From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [213.165.64.20] (helo=mail.gmx.net) by linuxtogo.org with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H4N3j-0002uo-Pm for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:54:59 +0100 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 09 Jan 2007 19:53:08 -0000 Received: from c-134-225-158.d.dsl.de.ignite.net (EHLO ip6-localhost) [62.134.225.158] by mail.gmx.net (mp046) with SMTP; 09 Jan 2007 20:53:08 +0100 X-Authenticated: #489940 Received: from patrick by ip6-localhost with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1H4MoP-0001bY-00; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:39:09 +0100 From: Patrick Ohly To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org In-Reply-To: References: <20061230051641.GA30225@hezmatt.org> <1167506369.5626.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20061230214326.GE15188@hezmatt.org> <4596E33D.306@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <20061230235938.GC16490@hezmatt.org> <1167523571.5626.59.camel@localhost.localdomain> <459786C7.70000@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <1168200264.15021.54.camel@ip6-localhost> <1662139633.20070107231632@gmail.com> <20070107220333.GC6625@hezmatt.org> <1168279741.4526.12.camel@ip6-localhost> Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:39:09 +0100 Message-Id: <1168371549.4166.17.camel@ip6-localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 Sender: Patrick Ohly X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Subject: Re: A question of workflow X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 19:54:59 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 13:54 +0100, Rolf Leggewie wrote: > Patrick Ohly wrote: > > * you have to keep track of which patches have been applied, and > > you cannot let tools do it for you > > Did you mean you wanted to know which of your patches have been applied > in OE? That's indeed what I meant. Just like quilt, patcher also keeps track of which patches are currently applied locally. > That one is also easy. They are the ones that quilt cannot > apply anymore when doing "quilt push -a" ;-) Not necessarily. The patch might also fail to apply because unrelated changes were made upstream, so the external contributor always has to check these conflicts manually. On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 13:51 +0100, Rolf Leggewie wrote: > > * you cannot easily(*) find out how your patch was modified after > > you submitted it; this implies that learning how to write better > > patches requires extra effort and thus becomes harder (more > > unlikely?) and that mistakes made by the core developer when > > merging the patch might not be detected by the external > > developer (hey, it might happen, so for the sake of the argument > > bear we me when I mention it ;-) > > This one is a little bit more work but still doable. Of course, and if there is no better solution I don't mind doing it. But that doesn't mean that one shouldn't at least search for a better solution. Too bad there doesn't seem to be any :-/ -- Bye, Patrick Ohly -- Patrick.Ohly@gmx.de http://www.estamos.de/