On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 02:44:35PM +0200, Ahmad Samir wrote: > On 15 January 2011 12:08, Remy CLOUARD <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > I just imported the RPM Spec File Syntax page in the wiki. > > > > It’s located here: http://mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?id=spec_syntax > > > > Please review this page as it’s one of the most important one for the > > beginning of the mentoring process, with the RPM Howto page (yet to be > > imported). > > > > Some comments on this page: > > - Patch naming: > > > > I’m not sure we should go that far for the patch naming policy, and in > > practice it’s not what I’ve seen up till now. > > > > Here’s a proposal: > > Patches must be named in a very explicit manner to make it very clear to > > what version it was originally applied. To that end, a patch needs to > > follow the convention of > > [package_name]-[version]-[description].patch: > > > > * [package_name] is the name of the package it applies against, such > > as 'shadow-utils' or 'gnupg' > > * [version] is the version of the program this patch was developed > > against, such as 1.0. The name of the patch should not change, > > I don't agree, if you rediff the patch against version 2.0 the the > version in the patch name should change; one reason is, it can't be > applied to version 1.0 any more without restoring the old patch from > an older SVN rev. or rediffing it again.
But that mean we lose history of svn ? -- Michael Scherer
