[Pkg-shadow-devel] Policy for patches in the sid branch

[Christian Perrier]

> It was the first time I used dpatch, so it is not necessarily _the_ way=
 to
> use dpatch.
>=20
> Here is how I generated the patch:

Maybe document this in README.patches for all of us dummies../)


> CVS sucks when it comes to renaming a file. The special numbering will
> have to be kept post-32.

Unless we switch to SVN which I'm thinking about for a while. Any
CVS->SVN wizard around=A0?


> Maybe we can just keep in mind that some patch should not be applied fo=
r
> the equivalence with 31sarge2, or document it in the patch.
>=20
> Maybe we could just list the patches for 31sarge2 in 00list, so that
> dpatch apply-all will generate 31sarge2, and applying all additional
> patches not present in 00list would generate post-32.

Yep, sounds interesting as you mentioned later.

> I modified the changelog in the patch.  But now I think it wasn't a goo=
d
> idea (it force the application of the the dpatch in the right order).
> A temporary debian/changelog-post32 seems better.

OK, let's go for a post32 changelog.


> I was thinking about the first one (notifications in the list, or in a
> new -commits list).
> I will anyway (try to) notify the list if there is no automatic
> notification.


Automated commit notifications would be nice, preferrably in a
dedicated list. That one already has the BTS junk and I sometimes fear
that more important messages are lost.

I can get a new list created easily as project admin. So, if someone
knows how we could activate automated notifications, (s)he's welcome.