contributing to dports

[Marco Righele]

> On 8/1/2015 3:09 PM, Marco Righele wrote:
>> * If my patch touches a file already modified by a FreeBSD patch in
>> files/, is it ok to use the same
>>   name ? (I'm thinking in the case the new patch could be used 
>> upstream).
> 
> There are no name clashes because the dports patch goes in the
> "dragonfly" directory and it's applied after the patches in the files
> directory.
> 
> I suggest that you try "make patch", then go to the
> /usr/obj/dports/<cat>/<portname>/work/<topdir>, then use the "portfix"
> (or genpatch) utility in /usr/dports/ports-mgmt/genpatch in order to
> create a properly formatted patch.  In the case you outline, there
> should be an ".intermediate" extension which indicates it's a patch to
> an already patched file.
> 

Thanks for the suggestions, I will try them out.

> Somebody has to put it in deltaports.  If you submit it to dports then
> you are in effect asking somebody else to adapt it to deltaports.  So
> "quick" is relative.  It might be quick for you, but a huge burden for
> the person trying to incoporate it.  And they'd try tricks like 
> "replace
> patch in files with this one".  That won't fly.

Ah, but I didn't mean that. What I was looking for was a way to generate 
the dports tree
from the DeltaPorts tree (but without the part about building the 
packages),
so that I can check if everything works before the pull request.

In fact it seems that the merge.sh from scripts/generator is quite close 
to what I had in mind;
I have to merge the whole tree but it doesn't take much time so I guess 
I will be fine
with that.

Marco