There are numerous patches in the debian packaging tree for yaVDR,
some of which have been naturally picked up from the standard debian
packages and some of which are yaVDR specific:

It is not immediately obvious which of these have been submitted to
Klaus for review, and which have been rejected from inclusion in
vanilla VDR. It would seem to be a good idea to go through all of
these and update the headers of them to indicate if they have either
been rejected, or are considered to be too
major/untested/plugin-specific to be included in the vanilla tree.
Debian have patch tagging guidelines which have appropriate fields
designed for this:

The patches already use these guidelines, with correct values for
Author, Description and sometimes Origin but just don't mention
whether the patches have been reviewed/rejected etc.

Ideally we'd go through all of these and add the 'Forwarded' tag to
either link to the mailing list thread where the patch has been
submitted to Klaus, or setting it to 'Forwarded: not-needed' for
patches that we know don't make sense to include in vanilla VDR (e.g.,
plugin specific etc.). Any patches that have previously been rejected
would also have an appropriate message appended to their description
field to indicate they had been rejected and for what reason (as per
the example on the above dep3 link).

As a first glance, there are a few small patches that it would seem
could be submitted to Klaus:

Before I rebase these as patches against the latest vanilla sources
and submit them on the mailing list, does anyone know if these have
previously been submitted, either by their authors (if still active),
or a current maintainer?

vdr mailing list

Reply via email to