Le jeu. 9 août 2018 à 16:29, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <[email protected]> a écrit : > > On Thursday, 09 August 2018 at 15:06, FeRD wrote: > > Thanks... I wasn't sure about that (probably should've asked first), but I > > couldn't *recall* seeing them in other package changelog history. I'll > > leave them alone in the future. > > > > Is there a typical pattern for updating the various branches for a package? > > https://rpmfusion.org/Contributors#Updating_an_existing_package is kind of > > silent on that point. It only really ever mentions branches in passing, and > > never explicitly addresses any procedures to perform operations between > > them. > > > > I ended up fast-forward merging master -> f28 -> f27 (because the updated > > .spec / patches were only present in master, at the start), but that felt a > > bit weird and carried the rebuild messages back into the package changelogs > > for earlier releases. > > I'd suggest adapting the opposite workflow. I.e. do the update in the > oldest branch you can support and then merge upwards. It's been working > quite well for me in Fedora. See for example the abcde package. This has > the advantage of not having to remove changelog entries or any other > changes relevant only to newer branches and makes it easy keep branch- > -specific stuff on that particular branch only while still allowing > fast-forward merges if the changes don't conflict. I feel like this way is a mines field, you will conflicts at some point because of changelog entries will need to be reordered or a given EVR meaning something different in others branches. This is totally non-trivial, non-usual, and a racy way of doing.
-- - Nicolas (kwizart) _______________________________________________ rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
