On 27 January 2017 at 04:50, Peter Hutterer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 05:48:10PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: >> From: Emil Velikov <[email protected]> >> >> Similar to the patch subject prefix we might as well handle the >> sendemail setting. >> >> Cc: Peter Hutterer <[email protected]> >> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <[email protected]> >> --- >> Here is another couple of patches that might be good to have tree-wide. >> 1/2 might be picky depending on how funny git decides to be. > > now I'm thinking: should we provide a xorg-prepare-git-repo.sh script with > the macros and run that from autogen? They're needed anyway, so... > > Touching tens of repositories is a lot of fun, but not really :) > Agreed and sorry about that - should have taken a closer look earlier.
There's one major downside of having the script in xorg-macros/elsewhere - iirc not all packages require it, and even when they do its presence is checked after we do autoreconf, in the middle of ./configure. Guess we can safely say that if you're missing xorg-macros (and/or haven't configure/built) the package you shouldn't be sending patches ;-) So we can "xorg-prepare-git-repo.sh 2>/dev/null" and be gone with it. > to answer the next question: > > first line in autogen.sh can be modulename="driver foo" and we can pass that > into the script. because I'm also tempted to auto-enable a git hook that > calls make before push ;) > Sounds like a nice plan. Doubt I'll have the time to look at this today, but I'll be flying tomorrow so will try and take a look as boredom peaks. Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
