-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
... >> You can maintain the property as well by adding a hook that applies the >> patches at checkout time. (Even that hook is not strictly necessary, as >> debuild will automatically apply patches at build time as necessary.) >> >> To me this question if patches should be applied to the branch or not >> seems to be a presentation issue, which should better be handled at >> presentation level. > > Personally, I agree that not applying branches in the branch is the best > way to work properly with the current tools available. > Honestly, I don't care a whole lot about "the current tools available". What we want to shoot for is how would you actually like to work. If the best we can get to is "it is only 1 more step to work the way you used to work" then we've failed, because all we've done is make the process *more* complicated. I'm happy to provide some support for gradual transition, and compatibility. But this shouldn't be designed around "let's make it work like it used to, only with extra steps added because we want to use bzr". Versioning the history without the patches applied is pretty silly, IMO. It means you get practically 0 benefit from using bzr. (unless maybe other people find bzr qannotate debian/patches/00-add-foo to be particularly enlightening. :) John =:-> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1StI4ACgkQJdeBCYSNAAPIzQCeN1BWv+pQ1o3MsanLRt8T4k0D 5D0An3nJywcriDsnNFoItyPZQABqNQuj =HBhG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
