Proposed Changes to Patches Repository

Tushar Teredesai tushar at linuxfromscratch.org
Thu Dec 9 17:58:32 PST 2004


Bruce Dubbs wrote:

> Jim Gifford wrote:
>
>> I have plans for the patches project that will effect everyone. I 
>> would like your feedback on the proposed changes to the patches 
>> repository.
>
Sorry for replying to the wrong message, the original post never made it 
to the news server.

>> 1 - SVN Structure
>>    Implement a structure that is easier to navigate and secure for 
>> all developers
>>    control of their own patches.
>>              Visual of proposed structure
>>                   trunk --> lfs {LFS Related Patches} Responsible 
>> Party LFS Editors
>>                   blfs {BLFS Related Patches} Responsible Party BLFS 
>> Editors
>>                   hlfs {HLFS Related Patches} Responsible Party HLFS 
>> Editors
>>                   hints {Hints Related Patches} Responsible Party 
>> Patch and Hints Maintainers
>>                   other {Patches not in above categories} Responsible 
>> Party Patch Maintainers
>>       Under this SVN Change, the xLFS maintainers, would control 
>> their patches, and
>>       would be responsible for making sure they meat the patches 
>> projects guidelines
>>       which would be set by Patch Maintainers, Matt, Bruce, and Robert.
>>       This would also mean the elimination of private patches 
>> archives, since you would
>>        have full control over the patches for your own books. As the 
>> patches maintainer
>>        I would enforce header policies only over the LFS, BLFS, and 
>> HLFS patches, everything
>>        else would be under the xLFS leaders control.
>>        Hints and other patches, would fall under my control.
>
Rather than having a seperate repository for each project how about 
allowing all the project guys to submit patches directly to the main 
repository? Editors should only add (never delete) patches to the 
repository that are relevant to their project. The patch maintainers 
would be responsible for all other patches and for cleaning up old junk. 
That way there is only one patch in the entire lfs repository instead of 
having one for each project.

In addition, svn's symlink capability could be used to keep a list of 
all the patches for a particular book.

--Tushar.



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list