On 25/10/2011 09:50, Paul Wise wrote: > > For the presentation side of things I am thinking one approach might be > to move UbuntuDiff[8] to the QA infrastructure, generalise it and > enhance it for this purpose. This will necessarily include mechanisms > to mark patches as having been dealt with or ignorable. > > 8. http://ubuntudiff.debian.net/ >
I'm glad you liked it. ubuntudiff¹ was made exactly to show this kind of data. Currently, all ubuntudiff needs to produce html pages in some file listing source package names and associated patches. So, nothing is really bound to patches.ubuntu.com, except the syntax of (the equivalent of) sources.patches. It is easy to set up an ubuntudiff instance for each set of derivative patches, but I guess some changes have to be implemented to have a unified interface for all those derivatives (i.e. all patches accessible from a single place). Current ubunutdiff uses grep-dctrl to select a list of packages. I think that people don't like that much, and they usually find it not easy to use. We will have to think about a better interface. About source code, it is written in OCaml. I realize that OCaml is not the best candidate if we want people to contribute patches (or even have a look at the code) :) It depends on who wants to contribute here. I'm open to suggestions… A nice feature that I'd like to keep is visualisation of patches by hunk… this will require a parser to read unified diffs. In any case, I'd be happy to help here to implement and setup this new service. ¹: btw, the tool's name is “maddie”. -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- 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/4ea6a420.3090...@dogguy.org
