On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 13:16:09 +0100 Adam Tkac <atkac redhat com> wrote: > I wrote it in previous mail. I like distributed VCS workflow - local > repository, local braches, local commits etc. That doesn't outline an improved workflow. In fact, it outlines adding /more/ steps for maintainers to get their changes into a place that actually matters. The vast majority of packages are simply just a spec file and the source tar. The interaction with the SCM is minimal at best, update a spec (or import an srpm), make tag build, move on with life. If you're adding (confusing) steps like "oh, I commited, but I actually have to /push/ that commit somewhere for the buildsystem to notice" I don't see where this adds value for the majority of maintainers. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love distributed source control, but I don't necessarily think it applies itself well to a centralized package scm. This is why I ask for envisioned workflows, something that is appealing to both people with lots of patches to manage (which really, we scream upstream upstream upstream, you shouldn't have a pile of patches except for specific cases), and to the far more common spec file + sources reference to tarball people. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
Description: PGP signature