Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le vendredi 16 mai 2008 à 16:04 -0400, Joey Hess a écrit : > > You're insinuatiog that a VCS does not allow easily browsing and > > examining patches, and I just don't buy it. > > I can do more than insinuating: a VCS does not allow easily browsing and > examining patches. It doesn’t prevent it, but solely, it is not > sufficient.
Just like a debian/patches is far from sufficient for presenting patches in a generally usable or understandable format, which is why Raphael is suggesting to add extra metadata to it. Coming up with a complex set of requirements that everyone has to follow up front in their workflow[1] is not going to yeld the best results, and I think that's my core reason for disliking Raphael's proposal. Now, if you can come up with protocols/interfaces that can be used to publish/communicate patches, that are managed/generated in whatever way is most useful for the maintainer, that seems more likely to work. -- see shy jo [1] I hate using this word, but I think you know what I mean.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
