[pkg-s48-maint] sunterlib CVS access

Lionel Elie Mamane lionel@mamane.lu
Mon Jun 27 06:56:07 2005

On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 04:39:48AM +0200, Jorgen Schaefer wrote:

> I just had an interesting talk with acarrico, the current maintainer
> of sunterlib. He missed the bug report you sent, as apparently, he
> was not Cc'd as he thought he would be.

Maybe that's because you are "only" project admin and not "bug tracker
techn. & manager". If you add yourself the "bug tracker technician"
bit, you'll get email notification of bug reports - I think. Unless
you have disabled it in your preferences or some such.

> <acarrico> forcer: do you or Lionel have cvs access to Sunterlib?
> > acarrico: Nope
> <acarrico> Set yourself up at Savannah and request membership if you are
>     interested.

Done. (Imagine there is here a plug for a better system than CVS: GNU
Arch (tla / baz), darcs, ...)

> > acarrico: Do you want the Debian modifications in sunterlib itself? I.e. a
>     debian/ subdirectory? Or what did you have in mind with giving us CVS
>     access? :-)
> <acarrico> I only had in mind that you can easily propagate bugs upstream if
>     you have access. But also, It would be fine to put the Debian subdir in
>     CVS (assuming it doesn't clash with other uses).
> <acarrico> propagate --bug fixes-- not --bugs--!

Forcer and I actually use darcs repositories for our Scheme48 / Scsh
packages. I'd like to continue doing so, but we can mirror our changes
to Sunterlib's CVS repository.

As for bug fixes, I understand that this is "social permission" to
commit bug fixes we judge correct directly to HEAD without your

How will we handle differences between the Debian version and CVS
HEAD? Examples of differences include backports of bug fixes to stable
version (but not backports of new feature that are also in CVS HEAD),
backports of security bugs to the version of sunterlib in Debian
stable, etc. I see these possibilities:

 - We don't. Debian "branches" stay out of sunterlib CVS and "only" in
   our darcs repositories. The Debian maintainers only commit their
   "bleeding edge" work to sunterlib CVS.

 - We create many branches in the sunterlib CVS, and many managerial
   tags to handle the merging between the branches.

   The list of branches would be something like DEBIAN_UNSTABLE,
   DEBIAN_STABLE, DEBIAN_OLDSTABLE. Managerial tags would be at least
   DEBIAN_UNSTABLE_to_HEAD_merge_point and
   HEAD_to_DEBIAN_UNSTABLE_merge_point. (To use with the
    cvs merge -j foo -j bar

   CVS branches are messy... I do with them if I have to, but their
   messiness is one of the big reasons I try to move away from CVS :)

> <acarrico> And assuming modified BSD is ok for whatever goes in
> there.

That's fine with me.