Gerfried Fuchs <rho...@deb.at> writes: > To me the solution is to see the person who does the backport as a part > of the packaging team. There is the need for having a communication > channel between the people anyway. Actually more and more packages are > moved into team maintenance and I'm pretty puzzled about the strong > objection on these grounds. And it would be very helpful for people that > store the packages in VCSes to have the backport changes in a seperate > branch so things won't get lost. It's IMHO the most natural thing to > do.[1][2][3]
> [1] http://git.debian.org/?p=logcheck/logcheck.git;a=heads > [2] http://git.debian.org/?p=users/jgoerzen/bacula;a=heads > [3] http://git.deb.at/w/pkg/ejabberd.git/heads If there's any complexity in the backport, that's probably true. But I'll note here that for all the backports I do for my packages, all the changes in the backport are mechanical (and automated) and maintaining that in a VCS is just more trouble than it's worth, so I don't bother. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fwxlz5zp....@windlord.stanford.edu
