[pkg-kolab] Re: circular dependencies?

[Benjamin Seidenberg]

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:

>On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
>  
>
>>Why does it suck to fork the entire thing? It's all one source package, so
>>it's just a few extra build steps. Actually, I would think it'd be easier
>>    
>>
>
>Agreed.  In fact, it is MUCH simpler to just fork the entire thing, and it
>allows you guys to stay uncoupled from us if there is a need (e.g. you don't
>have to bother "sideporting" anything immediately, and have a different
>release cycle than the regular cyrus-imapd packages).
>
>I higly suggest that you migrate to our SVN repo.  Since we aren't using
>bzr, it is not straightforward to deal with two repositories ;-)
>
>  
>
I'd like to add that Sven and I were talking, and really you only need 
to fork 3-4 files: changelog, control, the list of dpatch patches, and 
possibly rules. Also, if you want to work at it a bit, it's possible to 
make it all dependent on $MAIN_PKG in rules, and dynamically modify the 
other files from there, so as to only a delta of a few lines in one file.

HTH,
Benjamin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 256 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-kolab-devel/attachments/20060126/d13467f8/signature.pgp