Message-ID: <9fade1ffa91b2d5b2d53a7620265cea594d19780.camel@cogitri.dev>
Subject: Re: Enforcing patch headers for patches
From: Rasmus Thomsen <oss@cogitri.dev>
To: Kevin Daudt <kdaudt@alpinelinux.org>
Cc: ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 10:28:46 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20200428080647.GB1838755@alpha>
References: <4ac4d3aad3bf0f050070166b27a2344efe32e9b7.camel@cogitri.dev>
	 <20200428080647.GB1838755@alpha>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 10:06 +0200, Kevin Daudt wrote:
> I think this is a good idea as well, just a few points:
> 
> * How are we going to handle the existing patches?

I think we should just leave them as-is. It'd be a lot of work to
rework all patches now.

> * What if there is already a commit message present in the patch? Are
> we
>   going to prepend the header before that?

Yes, the patch header should be at the top of the file. The "Reason"
field of the patch header can be omitted if there's a commit message in
the patch since that should explain the reason for having the patch
already. The "Url" and "Upstream" field should be added though, so that
we can track progress of getting things upstream.

Thanks,

Rasmus