On Sun, 01 Jun 2008, George Danchev wrote: > Because people would hardly trust BTS for sourceful changes being > applied to a particular source tree.
The point of the BTS in this regard is to track the issues that lead to divergence; as a bonus you get a patch attached. If you don't trust that the patch attached by the maintainer is actually the patch that the maintainer is using, how are you going to trust the VCS or even the diff.gz in the archive is the actual patch that is being used? Furthermore, linking a divergence to a VCS revision is pretty easy, and upstreams resolving the divergences will lead to the relevant patches disappearing anyway. > Sure, that sounds pretty good to me, but would probably take decades > to deploy all debian source packages 3.0 (git) way, since 3.0 > (quilt) is currently on topic. Huh? This isn't an either/or situtation. We can have many SCM/VCS package formats in Debian. If review of them is something that you really want to see happen, you can make unified frontends to those SCM/VCS that reproduce a stack of patches. All this takes is someone doing the work; there's nothing inherent in any of the modern DVCSes that makes this impossible. Don Armstrong -- DIE! -- Maritza Campos http://www.crfh.net/d/20020601.html http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
