[vdr] Re: Patches over patches (CVS?)

[Klaus Schmidinger <Klaus.Schmidinger@cadsoft.de>]

Andreas Trauer wrote:
> 
> Hi list, hi Klaus,
> 
>  there are so many different patches and patch collections for VDR.
> 
>  Is there a reason that there is no CVS system (e.g. sourceforge.net) used?

Yes: I prefer to keep it the way it is ;-)

I just prefer to release complete versions, rather than having to
deal with a CVS tree that grows wild into hundreds of directions.
I'll surely adopt patches (or at least the ideas behind them, since
many patches just do too much, and don't adhere to the VDR coding style,
so they can't be used just like that ;-) as I continue development,
and the first thing I'll work on will be the auto-PID stuff.

> I found the "newbie question" by Bud Millwood in the archive (Tue, 27
> May 2003 17:15:15 +0200),
> but the answers are not sufficient.
> 
>  When someone has a patch, then it would be a good idea to put it in the
> CVS, so everyone could apply it right away, but there is still one
> version of the VDR.

A patch doesn't need to be in a CVS so that everybody can apply it.
Or am I missing something here?

>  Of course there must be someone, who decides which patch is interesting
> enough for the most people. Probably Klaus (with some proxies?).

I prefer to decide for myself what goes into the official VDR
source code ;-)

>  I see a lot of advantages in using a CVS system. There are a lot of
> people providing good patches for different functionalities. The most
> patches are provided for the mainline VDR 1.2.5, some are only for older
> versions, but when some patches are applied, there will be problems to
> apply more patches, that are based on the mainline version only.
> 
>  If these patches would become part of the mainline, then it would be
> much easier. Everyone could benefit from the better functionality.

The thing is just that I only want to have those things in the main
line that I am personally convinced of. I'd rather make additional
plugin interfaces that allow people to modify things as they like
than have each and every bell and whistle in the core code.

>  Klaus, you have mailed on Tue, 20 May 2003 10:55:39 +0200 in the thread
> *"vdr near final - time for cosmetic changes?" *that you plan to provide
> a plugin interface for the OSD, that were the Elchi patch could go, but
> that would not solve the problem, just move it to another place, because
> there are also people who want to patch the Elchi-version to make it
> look even better.

And where exactly would a CVS make a difference here?
Wheter you patch a patch or patch a plugin doesn't seem
that much different to me...

>  So IMHO the best way would be, when the most patches would go in the
> mainline as soon as possible after the patches are created, so everyone
> could update his VDR before providing new (smaller) patches.

As I said above, I only want to have those things in the core
code that I am really convinced of. If I would blindly adopt
each and every patch just as it comes up, I believe the core code
would degenerate pretty soon.

Klaus


-- 
Info:
To unsubscribe send a mail to ecartis@linuxtv.org with "unsubscribe vdr" as subject.