On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 17:43:00 +0000 Joonas Kylmälä <joonas.kylm...@iki.fi> wrote:
> Hi, Hi, > I have an image in my mind that maintaining patchwork for 58 or so git > repositories was difficult. If it doesn't turn out well there are > other options that we can try. Google was using Gerrit at least at > some point for AOSP development so we can look also if that is an > option or if there is some newly adopted patch review system for AOSP > or LineageOS. I'll think about that. Gerrit uses javascript. Some time ago I tried to use from the command line with gertty but it was not reliable enough. > >> [0001-Adapt-to-recent-LineageOS-forks-LineageOS-mirror.patch > >> [0001-Adapt-to-recent-LineageOS-forks-replicant-6.0-dev.patch > > Both commit messages don't give much details about why this is > > needed, but in another hand it might take some time to understand > > why upstream (lineageOS) might have done that too. > > Acked-By: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <gnu...@no-log.org> > > You have to read the commits mentioned in the dev branch's commit > message to know why. I think from Replicant project's point of view it > is enough to know that we have "adapted" the manifest to be same as in > upstream. In ideal world I would just cherry-pick the LineageOS commit > but the manifest repositories have diverged too much because our > repository names start with "replicant" and LineageOS ones start with > "LineageOS" so if there are some reorderings in the manifest it just > creates a big git merge conflict. > > Though, maybe I could have explained that we want to stay as similar > as possible to LineageOS. The two patches above are good enough as they are. Next time you could just git commit -c <lineageOS patch commit hash> or tell that you adapted their patch in the commit message, or point to their patch. Denis.
pgpdhjqnCpaHf.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
