RFR: GIT Package VCS

Stephen John Smoogen smooge at gmail.com
Fri Jun 8 01:02:49 UTC 2007

On 6/6/07, Christopher Blizzard <blizzard at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 10:31 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> >
> > Right.  I really don't think we want to just take our current system,
> > switch out CVS, and end up with all of the same workflows.  The change
> > should be more about how do we improve workflows.  That means thinking
> > about things like:
> > * How do we make it easier for a maintainer to rebase their package to
> > a
> > newer upstream?
> > * How do we make it easier for a maintainer to develop, test, and
> > create
> > a patch to fix a problem that's being experienced in Fedora?
> > * How do we make it easy to send these patches to the upstream of the
> > project being worked on?
> > * How do we enable downstreams to take our bits, track them and make
> > changes as they need/want?
> > * How do we better enable a user who has a problem with something we
> > ship to be able to fix it themselves and get the fix back to us?

stuff snipped.

> o Do we want to move to a process where code is just in a repo and it's
> built automatically instead of source + patches + spec file?

I am on fumes as I said.. but I do not see how the last 2 points above
from Jeremy can be done with this one. Do you have an idea or is this
something that is blindingly obvious?


Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"

More information about the Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list