On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 05:19:50PM +0100, Roland Mas wrote: > > Now, if I could run an 'apt-get source -t unstable foo' and create > > my patch against the resulting source package, and be sure that the > > maintainer won't reject it on the grounds of the patch not being > > against the head (or latest, or whatever) of whichever $DVCS they > > happen to be using, then things would be a little better. > > I believe that's exactly what debcheckout(1) is for.
Indeed. > As for generating the patch, maybe debcommit(1) could be extended to > provide a --diff-only option that would just output a patch rather > than try to actually commit. And while we're at it, maybe there could I've just committed such a change, try "debcommit --diff" from ... well, only from "debcheckout devscripts" for the moment. > be a debcheckout --update option that would update the working copy to > the current state of the repository. I see less the point of this, but maybe it's just me. What we are basically doing with these features is to abstract over a particular $VCS. The initial point about debcheckout was most about retrieving the information about where a given package is maintained and use the appropriate tool to check it out. It was not (at least in my mind) to enable a developer not knowing a given $VCS to use it, so I'm a bit scared about this proposal: can't the developer just do "$VCS update" from the last working copy she checked out? Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what? [EMAIL PROTECTED],cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -<%>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature