From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JQpBV-0006I9-MO for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:28:23 +0100 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JQpAu-0004kP-GV for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:27:44 +0000 Received: from ip-62-143-227-114.1411n-cud12k-01.ish.de ([62.143.227.114]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:27:44 +0000 Received: from no2spam by ip-62-143-227-114.1411n-cud12k-01.ish.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:27:44 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org From: Rolf Leggewie Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:27:30 +0100 Message-ID: References: <47B853FA.5060206@gmx.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-62-143-227-114.1411n-cud12k-01.ish.de User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) In-Reply-To: <47B853FA.5060206@gmx.net> Sender: news X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 80.91.229.2 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gcho-openembedded-devel@m.gmane.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on serenity X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.2.3 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:39:36 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: [RFC] push those patches, push'em up 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: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:28:23 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Schuster wrote: > while I like the idea I wonder what we do with patches taken from other > famous distributions. Hi Robert, thank you for the important question. I guess there is not one single answer, but I think taking patches from other distributions makes a lot of sense. That is where the proposed and optional "origin:"-line would come into play. Now what to do about "upstream:". I guess there are two possibilities here. 1) you can establish that the patch is already pushed upstream. Then all you need to do is include the URL of the bug report somebody else made. You get extra kudos for making a comment in that bug report that OE also uses and endorses the patch. This is the most desirable and thus you should search the upstream bug tracker first. 2) you cannot establish that the patch is already pushed upstream. I'd say, it is best then to open a new bug report upstream, include the URL to it in "upstream:" and let the upstream people mark it as dupe should there have been another report. Mentioning the debian origin should increase the likelihood of it getting applied, I assume. I just realize now that this approach depends on debian and other distros using public channels to push their patches upstream. Do you happen to know if that is usually the case? Regards Rolf