> On Oct 24, 2016, at 2:13 PM, Michael <keybou...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm looking into what "Git for Windows" does, because this is exactly > what they do -- maintain a large set of patches that are release > specific and not integrated upstream. And, it's my understanding that > MacPorts is basically a pair of (port file: how to compile; patch > files: how Mac OS / Xnu / Mach differs from Unix/Linux/Debian). I was > under the impression that the switch from SVN to maintain the patch > files to Git to maintain the patch files (not the port files) was the > issue where you wanted rebases at each upstream release.
No, the rebasing angle applies to pull requests (and any other branches that might crop up, although we don't expect any). We want the ports master history to be linear, so any additions must apply cleanly to the end of it, and force-pushing will not be allowed. The master branch will never lose history. As Daniel and Ryan noted, we have always had to maintain patch series for individual ports, we will continue doing so, and the GitHub migration will not affect the way maintainers choose to do it. vq _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
