Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l)
От | Martijn van Oosterhout |
---|---|
Тема | Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20010719153333.A1490@svana.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 12:11:47AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> writes: > > On Wednesday 18 July 2001 10:42 pm, Tom Lane wrote: > >> ISTM that it'd be a good thing if current versions of all the add-on > >> source files for both Debian and RedHat RPMs were part of our CVS tree > > > Deja vu... didn't we have this discussion a month or two back?? :-) ( > > http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=115437#thread ) > > Yeah, we did. You seemed willing, but there was a notable silence > from the Debian quarter. There have been discussions in the past on the debian mailing lists about whether it is a good idea for upstream sources to include the debian patch. The gist of it that since debian builds packages based on a pristine source tar ball and a patch, if the patch were upstream, would the patch have to patch its own upstream version? If however they were merely stored in contrib/distributions/patches or some such and there was an understanding that that may not match what is currently available from debian, then I see no problem. -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > It would be nice if someone came up with a certification system that > actually separated those who can barely regurgitate what they crammed over > the last few weeks from those who command secret ninja networking powers.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: