On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 10:30 -0400, James Westby wrote: > After talking with a few people about it over the last few weeks, and > seeing some difficulties that people face with merge-upstream, I'd like > to start a discussion of what could be done to improve it. > > I have some ideas, but please present any others you have. > > 1) The obvious one, watch file intergration. > > We don't have to make you give the URL of the tarball if you have a > watch file. This has been the intent from the first day I wrote > merge-upstream, and the reason why "--version" is a mandatory option > right now, I just haven't got around to it. > > I'd be more than happy to help someone implement this. The uscan part > isn't too hard, you just have to run it with a certain combination of > options and parse the resulting xml-like. The only difficulty is > threading it in to the maze of code to deal with all the optional > arguments. I'd love to clean that up and get this feature in. +1 This'd be a great feature indeed. It would be nice to implement this by using the UpstreamSource API (perhaps by extending it with some optional methods).
> 2) Another obvious one, fixing bugs. > > I've just found another "incosistent delta" bug, and there are probably > more. Getting them fixed would make it more reliable. > > There may be other classes of bug to fix too. I haven't seen any of these in a while. Maybe I'm just lucky :-) Cheers, Jelmer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
