Patch systems in packages

Scott Kitterman ubuntu at
Wed Aug 27 22:25:02 BST 2008

On Wednesday 27 August 2008 16:47:24 Phillip Susi wrote:
> Emmet Hikory wrote:
> >     I am not advocating the storage of patches in the diff.gz, as I
> > believe that this makes the package awkward to extend when Ubuntu
> > seeks to add patches: I'd much prefer that each package have a patch
> > system.  I understand that for work in Debian, using a VCS in place of
> > a patch system can be easier, but it's certainly not easier for
> > derivatives, especially for patches that do not belong back in Debian.
> Agreed.
> >  Rather I am arguing against the introduction of a patch system in
> > Ubuntu for packages that maintain patches in the diff.gz in Debian
> > except in the rare case where there is such a vast separation in the
> > Ubuntu and Debian packaging that it becomes easier to apply Debian
> > patches by reviewing debdiffs between Debian packages rather than
> > either using the merge tools or rebasing packaging off the Debian
> > package each time.
> >
> > 1:
> >
> >l
> Sounds like we are in agreement in principal; we just disagree exactly
> where to draw the line.  I'd rather get the pain of adding the patch
> system over sooner so it doesn't grow worse when I have to do it later.
>   Also if debian is using a VCS then it becomes fairly easy to pull the
> patches from their VCS and merge them into our VCS or patch system,
> rather than trying to do a hand merge between the two .diff.gz files.

Right, but this still leads to the difficult scenario I mentioned yesterday 
where the Debian maintainer incorporates the patch, MoM completely fails to 
notice it, and then the best thing that can happen is the package fails to 

Scott K

More information about the Ubuntu-motu mailing list