Patryk Zawadzki wrote: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> 2008/9/11 Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> Le jeudi 11 septembre 2008 à 09:01 -0400, Luis Villa a écrit : >>>> Is anybody regularly reviewing/triaging those? I assume no, right? >>>> 'twould be a great project for somebody. >>> We are trying to forward all those that are relevant for upstream in >>> bugzilla, but given this is a manual process, we often forget some. >> I was thinking more on the GNOME side- if the distributors are doing >> an inevitably mixed job of getting things back upstream, maybe we >> should encourage a person or team of people to pull/review regularly. > > There's another problem here. While we try to push all bugs and > patches upstream from PLD Linux, we do have some patches that even we > don't know the purpose of. There are some patches that mention gnome > 2.12 for example and they either still apply cleanly or were adjusted > over the course of time but no clean indication exists as to why they > do what they do. It's a horrible situation but sometimes the patch > authors are simply no longer around or the original description was so > brief that it no longer rings a bell.
Every distro in that situation is a potential GNOME-Goal task. Embrace the community: clean up your distro! behdad > Also I see we sometimes avoid sending patches for fixing redhatisms > (X-RedHat-*) in desktop files upstream and just patch them on our > side. Same for some other files desktop-file-install complains about. > Not sure about the exact reason but it might be possible that our menu > category structure is not a verbatim copy of upstream (some geniuses > at some point decided mc, bc and vim deserved a desktop menu entry in > PLD so I am too scared to check the rest of our customizations). > _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
