Update on patches upstream policy

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Update on patches upstream policy

Kristýna Streitová
Hello,

I've just adjusted "Upstream policy" section [1] in our
"openSUSE:Packaging Patches guidelines" on openSUSE Wiki in order to
explain our current patch policy better.

The previous version of the paragraph only mentioned that patches should
be sent upstream first when OBS package maintainer requires it.
However, the truth is that all patches that can be interesting to
upstream must *always* be sent to them. I hope that now the paragraph is
clearer regarding this topic.

If you are not familiar with this policy, please take your time and read
this article.

Also, if you maintain any package, please check whether it contains any
patches that should be sent upstream. It's never too late to do it :)

Thank you!

Best regards,
Kristyna Streitova


[1]
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Patches_guidelines#Upstream_policy


signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Update on patches upstream policy

Christian Boltz-5
Hello,

Am Montag, 7. August 2017, 11:58:07 CEST schrieb Kristýna Streitová:
> I've just adjusted "Upstream policy" section [1] in our
...
> it. However, the truth is that all patches that can be interesting to
> upstream must *always* be sent to them. I hope that now the paragraph
> is clearer regarding this topic.

Thanks!

Scrolling down a bit in the page, I noticed in the "Patch markup"
section [1]:

    Features for openSUSE-specific things (AppArmor integration, for
    instance) with no interest for upstream maintainers.

IMHO this is a bad example.

It's not really hard to make AppArmor profiles compatible with multiple
distributions, which also means the profiles can and should be upstreamed
(either to the upstream project or to AppArmor upstream).

Does someone know a better example to list as openSUSE-specific feature?
Otherwise (unless someone objects) I'll just remove AppArmor profiles as
example for openSUSE-only patches in a few days.


Regards,

Christian Boltz

[1] https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Patches_guidelines#Patch_markup_.28also_called_.22Tagging_patches.22.29

--
# 60 Sekunden warten
sleep 180
[Ausschnitt aus einem Script von Martin Hofius in opensuse-de]

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Update on patches upstream policy

Simon Lees-3


On 08/08/17 02:10, Christian Boltz wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Am Montag, 7. August 2017, 11:58:07 CEST schrieb Kristýna Streitová:
>> I've just adjusted "Upstream policy" section [1] in our
> ...
>> it. However, the truth is that all patches that can be interesting to
>> upstream must *always* be sent to them. I hope that now the paragraph
>> is clearer regarding this topic.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Scrolling down a bit in the page, I noticed in the "Patch markup"
> section [1]:
>
>     Features for openSUSE-specific things (AppArmor integration, for
>     instance) with no interest for upstream maintainers.
>
> IMHO this is a bad example.
>
> It's not really hard to make AppArmor profiles compatible with multiple
> distributions, which also means the profiles can and should be upstreamed
> (either to the upstream project or to AppArmor upstream).
>
> Does someone know a better example to list as openSUSE-specific feature?
> Otherwise (unless someone objects) I'll just remove AppArmor profiles as
> example for openSUSE-only patches in a few days.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Christian Boltz
>
> [1] https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Patches_guidelines#Patch_markup_.28also_called_.22Tagging_patches.22.29
>
One is the way we use /etc/sysconfig to determine which display manager
to start via the display manager service rather then starting the gdm,
lightdm etc service directly.

--

Simon Lees (Simotek)                            http://simotek.net

Emergency Update Team                           keybase.io/simotek
SUSE Linux                           Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30
GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B


signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Update on patches upstream policy

Dave Plater lst
In reply to this post by Christian Boltz-5


On 07/08/2017 18:40, Christian Boltz wrote:
> Does someone know a better example to list as openSUSE-specific feature?
> Otherwise (unless someone objects) I'll just remove AppArmor profiles as
> example for openSUSE-only patches in a few days.
I made rosegarden-10.10-filepaths.patch for rosegarden years ago when I
discovered that no templates or examples were available in the file
menu, when I discussed this on their devel list they weren't interested
in integrating it but it's still in the package at version 17.04, this
is an openSUSE specific feature. Any patch that disables the online
update is also an openSUSE specific feature.

Dave P
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]