RFS: updated linuxtv-dvb-apps [Was: r7625 ...]

Stéphane Glondu steph at glondu.net
Sun May 3 17:52:29 UTC 2009

Mark Purcell a écrit :
> I have done the bulk of recent work with dvb-apps and am not against git, but 
> also haven't played around with git so I don't yet understand the workflow.  
> I'm very comfortable with svn, which is where we are at.
> It's not that i'm against it, but as I don't know how to use it, I'm hesitant 
> to make wholesale change until I am comfortable.

I was just talking about this one package... nothing more :-)

> Please don't migrate to git yet as I mentioned I'm not yet comfortable.


> I think there are also more important things we could do, such as packaging a 
> proper library and as you say working with upstream for proper soname support. 
> the range of lintian errors, warnings etc spring to mind.

The point in that migration was to get an environment where I am more
comfortable and efficient... so IMHO it would have been the most
important thing to do (if not THE thing to do) before I do anything else
on the package. You obviously care about the package, so of course, I
will comply to your preferences.

Er... I realize the way I stated things might be quite offending, but I
didn't mean to. There are cases where people are too lazy / have no time
to convert their repository and just stick to the svn repository because
it's been there for a while, even though they are familiar with other

> I would also like to work with upstream on getting a proper release (beyone 
> 1.1.1) and in the shorter term pulling a more recent snapshot than rev1207 
> into debian.


> I also feel that quilt is overkill for two patches.  Indeed dpatch is probably 
> overkill and we should be using something like simplpatchsys.

I see quilt just as a way to apply patches. So is dpatch and
simplpatchsys. I prefer quilt because series can be directly serialized
to/from a git branch (with git format-patch/am) with no external hacks.
Besides, it seems more natural with the advent of the new source format
3.0 (quilt). Simplpatchsys, on the other hand, seems too CDBS-specific,
so I'd rather we didn't use that.

> I do like the simplicity of cdbs as well as the wide adoption across Debian 
> provides for good long term support.  So the simplicity of dh does appeal, 
> however it maybe a little early and as I said I think there are better things 
> we could do for dvb-apps support.

CDBS is fine as long as there is no build-related problem or
specificities, otherwise it can become a nightmare to customize (without
upstream patching) and to debug... Hopefully, we aren't not there yet
with dvb-apps.



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-vdr-dvb-devel/attachments/20090503/7587eb74/attachment.pgp>

More information about the pkg-vdr-dvb-devel mailing list