forks versus backports

[Scarlett Clark]

Okies, I created xenial-backports repos for the twisted stack of repos, I
see now I had a case of dislexia, but should it matter, I know not.
Jobs are not being made for them though, does xenial-backports need to be
added to the FUTURE_SKIP list in job_updater?
Scarlett


On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Scarlett Clark <sgclarkkde at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Ok, sorry, somehow I missed the memo on backports-xenial.
> I will move over my pile of twisted stuff today.
> Cheers,
> Scarlett
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Harald Sitter <sitter at kde.org> wrote:
>
>> A while ago it was pointed out to me that the forks/* git repos
>> includes backports. I then proposed that we don't mix forks with
>> backports because they are literally not the same.
>>
>> So, here I go again.
>>
>> New rule:
>>
>> - forks/* are forks *we* maintain
>> - backports are to be put into a directory codifying what they were
>> made for e.g. backports-xenial/*
>>
>> Forks include KDE software which is not maintained inside the pkg-kde
>> git repos (e.g. k3b) as well as software we need diverging from
>> compared to Ubuntu (e.g. live-build?).
>>
>> Backports is everything that we do not care about sans needing a
>> newer/different version.
>>
>> To that end if you created a repo that is in fact a backport but you
>> put it in the forks directory, please move it to a new
>> backports-xenial dir.
>>
>> HS
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/neon/attachments/20171128/09178393/attachment.html>