httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.C...@Golux.Com>
Subject Re: [POLL] apachen/patches directory
Date Sun, 11 Jan 1998 18:23:13 GMT
Randy Terbush wrote:
> 
> > > * This setup should not even consider auto commiting.
> >
> > Not arguing, but why not?  Just curious.
> 
> Mainly because it opens up these very fragile repositories to potential
> abuse. Since we have the ability to commit directly to the repository,
> why add another step that would require us to create a patch, mail it
> to an auto committer, and hope that something doesn't go amiss and lock
> up the repository until someone gets around to fixing it.

No, no - that auto-committing step is so people who *don't* have CVS
access can send mail to new-httpd with "Subject: [PATCH]" and have
the message committed to the *patches* directory.  No auto-committing
of patches against the source.

> Perhaps I don't completely understand what you want to implement.
> Seems that the commit messages currently provide much of what you
> describe. I'm understanding that you are wanting to commit these
> commit messages to yet another CVS repository.

No, not committing the commit messages.  Rather than generating a patch
and mailing it to new-httpd, and requiring people to extract it, you
instead generate the patch, put it in apachen/needsvoting, and commit
it *there* with cvs add.  Then the commit message serves as the "here's
a patch" message instead of a separate manual one sent to new-httpd.
Rather than having to extract the patch from mail, people can just
cvs update and then "patch <apachen/needsvoting/001-deans_latest.patch".
The patches under consideration are kept in the repository so you
get them along with any other updated stuff.  The CVS message from
the commitment to the patch directory (not to the source) becomes
informational rather than integral.

> Simply filtering cvs-commits with procmail to a local mailbox. The
> mailbox is indexed with glimpse to allow me to search it when I
> wish.

In that case the only change would be that you'd see a minimum of
three CVS messages: the commitment of the patch to the patches
directory, the application of it to the sources (if approved; what
we have now), and the cvs rm of the patch from the patch directory
after it has been applied.  Since the changes are the first and
last messages (plus any that modified the patch in the patch
directory before it was applied to the source), all would mention
the patch directory in the subject line, which should make tailoring
simple.

Is this any clearer?

#ken	P-)}

Mime
View raw message