Re: patch vs. overwrite in bzr [was: Next pretest, and regressions policy]

[Bastien]

Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden> writes:

> Roland Winkler <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 01 2012, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>>> At a first glance, there are places where copyright notices and other
>>>> boilerplate are overwritten with older text. The most glaring case is
>>>> this:
>>>
>>> Once again: please *never ever* overwrite files.  Always apply
>>> a patch instead.
>>
>> I read this at several occassions. -- I am not an expert with bzr and I
>> was wondering whether "never overwriting files" translates into a
>> recommended work flow with bzr.
>
> Stefan's advice has nothing to do with bzr. It is about not blindly
> overwriting changes made on the emacs repo with the new version of the
> externally-maintained package (`Org' is in this case.) Applying a patch
> gives a lot more opportunities for noticing conflicts (suppossing that
> the hacker cares to examine the output of the patch command, that is.)

The problem is: how to create a patch from Org git repo that can be
easily applied to Emacs bzr repo.

If someone can come up with a workable solution, that'd help me a lot.

Oscar, you said:

> I suggest that, before syncing, you obtain a diff from the bzr (or git)
> emacs repo that contains all changes to org since your last sync, commit
> the diff onto your org sources and then proceed with the new sync.

Which is theoretically fine... but if someone can actually *test* the
suggested workflow, I'm all ears.

Thanks!

-- 
 Bastien