On 04/07/2011 09:23 PM, Rodrigo Moya wrote: > Priority: medium? > > While working on the GNOME3 PPA during this cycle, I found we have a lot > of patches in many packages, which makes things harder when upgrading to > major versions, and also introduces new ways for the apps to fail, as > the fixes are rebased to apply to the new upstream version. > > While some patches make a lot of sense, others are better kept in the > upstream source, where the upstream developers can guarantee the quality > accross major versions upgrades. > > So, for next cycle, I would suggest a "small" goal of trying to do patch > upstreaming/cleaning days, maybe once a week or every 2 weeks. > > Also, some Ubuntu-specific patches, like the appindicators ones are > duplicated in lots of packages, so it would be good if we could find a > better way to make upstream apps use them, like, for instance, patching > gtk_status_icon_* in GTK itself to use the indicators when available, > instead of having to patch dozens of apps (and keep those patches > up-to-date and working for every major version upgrade). > > Another candidate for that could be the launchpad integration patches, > which are present in many more packages than the appindicators ones. I'm > sure we can find a way to have that in GTK itself, so that whenever a > Help menu is created, and given we have the name of the app, it could > just create the LPI entries. > > +100 for this topic. The amount of patches we carry is a huge but mostly silent overhead. I'd like to make a website like versions [1] that shows our diff against vanilla GNOME to make this more visible.
[1] http://people.canonical.com/~platform/desktop/versions.html -- ubuntu-desktop mailing list ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
