Upstreaming patches

Upstreaming patches

[Philip Balister]

Saul Wold asked me about upstreaming some of the patches in OE. 
Apparently, Intel has some people who can look at submitting some of our 
patches upstream.

The question is, what do we do about attribution? The problem is that is 
not simple for many cases working out who created the patch. Rather than 
spend time chasing through the revision history, it would be simpler to 
send the patches upstream mentioning the source as derived from OE.

My thoughts are no reasonable OE contributor would object to someone 
else upstreaming their patches :), but I thought I should ask people 
what they thought.

Obviously, if there is a complex patch the situation is different, but I 
suspect most of the easy patches do not fall into this category.

Comments?

Philip

Re: Upstreaming patches

[Graham Gower]

On 12 April 2011 09:16, Philip Balister <philip@balister.org> wrote:
> Saul Wold asked me about upstreaming some of the patches in OE. Apparently,
> Intel has some people who can look at submitting some of our patches
> upstream.
>
> The question is, what do we do about attribution? The problem is that is not
> simple for many cases working out who created the patch. Rather than spend
> time chasing through the revision history, it would be simpler to send the
> patches upstream mentioning the source as derived from OE.
>
> My thoughts are no reasonable OE contributor would object to someone else
> upstreaming their patches :), but I thought I should ask people what they
> thought.
>
> Obviously, if there is a complex patch the situation is different, but I
> suspect most of the easy patches do not fall into this category.
>
> Comments?
>
> Philip
>

Sounds good. I think omission of attribution if no original author can
be identified is fine. Its more important that the work not be lost.

Please note that many patches submitted upstream have already been
ignored by upstream.

-Graham

Re: Upstreaming patches

[Paul Menzel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1833 bytes --]

Am Dienstag, den 12.04.2011, 09:29 +0930 schrieb Graham Gower:
> On 12 April 2011 09:16, Philip Balister <philip@balister.org> wrote:
> > Saul Wold asked me about upstreaming some of the patches in OE. Apparently,
> > Intel has some people who can look at submitting some of our patches
> > upstream.

That is great. It is indeed very time consuming to find out the correct
place to send patches and register at the ticketing/bug tracking system
or – most of the time – subscribe to the corresponding mailing list.

> > The question is, what do we do about attribution? The problem is that is not
> > simple for many cases working out who created the patch. Rather than spend
> > time chasing through the revision history, it would be simpler to send the
> > patches upstream mentioning the source as derived from OE.
> >
> > My thoughts are no reasonable OE contributor would object to someone else
> > upstreaming their patches :), but I thought I should ask people what they
> > thought.
> >
> > Obviously, if there is a complex patch the situation is different, but I
> > suspect most of the easy patches do not fall into this category.
> >
> > Comments?

> Sounds good. I think omission of attribution if no original author can
> be identified is fine. Its more important that the work not be lost.

In my opinion at least a

        git log --follow recipe/path/to/patch/file.patch

should be tried. Additionally to make things maybe easier it could be
searched for patches with a patch header [1] and track their status.

> Please note that many patches submitted upstream have already been
> ignored by upstream.

Hopefully those patches have a patch header and the report can be
updated easily.


Thanks,

Paul


[1] http://openembedded.org/index.php/Push_patches_upstream

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: Upstreaming patches

[Esben Haabendal]

Graham Gower <graham.gower@gmail.com> writes:

> Sounds good. I think omission of attribution if no original author can
> be identified is fine. Its more important that the work not be lost.
>
> Please note that many patches submitted upstream have already been
> ignored by upstream.

No harm in trying again.

/Esben