paul at mattal.com
Thu Mar 11 00:01:58 CET 2010
I wanted to ask about how others treat patching.
My understanding of our patching philosophy is:
1) Don't patch if doing so makes us un-vanilla. Users familiar with
the standard behavior of software should be able to rely on our
packaged versions to behave the same way.
2) If there's some major roadblock (crash, hang, data loss, chronic
incompatibility), apply a reasonable patch as a workaround, as long
as this kind of patch for this kind of problem has not been rejected
upstream. Report the bug and patch upstream, and remove the patch
from our package when upstream integrates a fix.
3) We don't maintain upstream software; we should not do a lot of
work to patch unmaintained software.
Is this a good summary? Or do others have differing views on some of
this? Things to add?
More information about the arch-dev-public