Field "Upstream Status" in patch headers

Matthew Burgess matthew at
Tue Aug 17 11:29:13 PDT 2004

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:21:42 -0500
Randy McMurchy <randy at> wrote:

> I can think right off hand of a couple of packages, which have
> patches in the LFS repository and will/can never be submitted
> upstream:
> The Vixie Cron patches and the patch I developed for the nss_db
> package. Both of these packages have been out of maintenance by
> the original maintainers for a *long* time, yet the packages still
> add value to some in the community.

In which case they could be submitted as "Do not submit" with an
explanation that doing so would be futile or is simply impossible. 

> Stifling the submission of patches simply because they
> aren't/can't/won't be submitted upstream serves no good purpose.

But, IMO it does.  We don't want have to maintain these patches
across upstream version upgrades.  Only if they're submitted upstream
can this potential maintenance burden be lifted.  Plus of course, the
wider audience that will benefit from the patch being applied upstream
as opposed to just being local to the patches project here in LFS/BLFS

> Of course, this is just an opinion.

As is/was mine of course :)



More information about the patches mailing list