On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:28:53 -0800
Britton Kerin <britton.kerin_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Britton,
> The -6.1- substring seems to imply that these patches are intended to
> apply cleanly to version 6.1, but the date strings that are appended
> suggest that maybe they aren't. And they don't (for these two at
> least).
>
> How is this supposed to work?
>
> I could make a script to test the patches again the given version if
> -6.1- or something is included.
this is all too complex, as most people who submit patches here lack
diligence:
Patches with versions should apply to the released versions. Everything
upstream should be called "git" and the date of patch release.
It's the task of the patch maintainer/submitter to rebase his patches
accordingly to each release, which is not difficult as dwm has very
slow releases.
Say, I submit a patch today to give dwm a HAL-9000 color scheme and
call it
dwm-hal-6.1.patch
dwm-hal-git-2016-06-14.patch
applying to both the 6.1 release version (always the latest release
for patches) and the git HEAD respectively.
Now, let's assume I go abroad to North Korea or something, and nobody
gives a shit about the patch (Most of the dwm patches in the wiki are
dead, I did the cleanup for st already, but dwm is still pending).
Now, let's say we release 6.2 and 6.3 before I return. So, now, when
I check back in in 2018, what I should do is create the following
patches:
dwm-hal-6.2.patch
dwm-hal-6.3.patch
dwm-hal-git-2018-05-13.patch
And that's it! :D
TL;DR
There are 3 rules here that we should abide to:
1) If you update the patch against git HEAD, remove the old
git-patch. There should always be one latest git patch.
People who really need an older git patch can check the
suckless-wiki git-logs.
2) If you publish a new patch, create 2 versions: for
the latest release and for git HEAD (even if they're
the same)
3) Maintaining a patch involves both creating new patches
for future tags and updating the git-patch as often
as necessary so it's easy enough to use.
An exception is when a feature pulled into mainline
makes the patch superfluous.
A point of debate for me really is when it comes to those super-
fluous patches. Should we remove them or provide them for older
versions of dwm?
In my opinion, there is no reason for this legacy stuff. The
dwm-patch section is already cramped enough, a cleanup would
be pretty helpful.
What do you guys think?
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Wed Jun 15 2016 - 13:07:03 CEST