Please check my thinking on bug 646979

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/5/2010 9:50 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 05, 2010, at 09:37 AM, John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> 
>> Now, I would imagine that the *interesting* merges are not clean like
>> this. Why would you really care about merging if debian isn't adding
>> patches to the upstream code? (Other than procedurally being the right
>> thing to do, it doesn't seem *interesting*.)
> 
> Won't all the patches Debian (or Ubuntu) adds be in patch system files living
> in debian/?  Of course, the looms<->patchsystem idea kind of blurs that, but
> ultimately the packaging directory should fully contain any downstream changes
> Ubuntu or Debian would add.  (I think. ;)
> 
> -Barry

So by debian policy, any changes to the tree will be in patches. But you
have to consider that v3 deb packages also contain those changes in the
tree itself.

If you wanted to maintain the histories independently, then you have to
play games with creating a pristine tree, merging, then replaying,
merging that, etc.

I'm still trying to sort it out in my head, to see if there are some
extra steps that the importer/merge-package code can do, to help keep
these things more manageable.

John
=:_>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEUEARECAAYFAkyrPSkACgkQJdeBCYSNAAN6sACfWju7CdMDJtbT0Fiv6kI9xnUx
FsUAkwfEufLLdycnuHHapGgA6qdZWYg=
=SjdD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----