1 |
On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 11:58:13 +0200 |
2 |
Angelo Arrifano <miknix@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> With my experience in Gentoo-embedded I can also present a problem |
4 |
> where branching is extremely useful: |
5 |
> 1) Package foobar-1.2 is in the tree and keyworded only for ~x86 |
6 |
> ~amd64. 2) Some dev at -embedded decides that package is useful and |
7 |
> applies his traditional cross-compile hackery. |
8 |
> 3) The usual route would be to open a shi*load of bugs, wait a |
9 |
> cr*pload of time for the maintainer response and if the weather feels |
10 |
> like it, there is authorization to commit. Then there is also need to |
11 |
> retest for already keyworded arches so we know we don't break others. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> 3*) With git, one would just branch (lets call it embedded branch) the |
14 |
> package. Apply the patches there and let people using embedded |
15 |
> profiles to emerge from that branch instead of master. |
16 |
> Benefits? I think they are pretty obvious - people can start putting |
17 |
> quick patches in the tree for specific arches while not breaking |
18 |
> others. |
19 |
|
20 |
And then you have to keep merging master into your embedded branch |
21 |
every few hours to keep up. It's a waste of time. Instead, you should |
22 |
just put a modified foobar-1.2 in your own repository and rely upon the |
23 |
package manager's extensive and clean handling of multiple repositories |
24 |
to avoid having to do any merging yourself. |
25 |
|
26 |
There are uses for merges, but working around the shortcomings in a |
27 |
package manager shouldn't be one of them. Migrating to Git should be |
28 |
about addressing problems with CVS, not about addressing problems with |
29 |
Portage. |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
Ciaran McCreesh |