Hi,
anonym wrote (18 May 2014 22:33:47 GMT) :
> This branch imports Tor Launcher 0.2.5.4 (from 0.2.5.3) + a few fixes
> from master (see commit message). With this package, our delta against
> upstream has only decreased since upstream has fixed several things we
> patched in our Tor Launcher. So beside merging in the new upstream
> changes, I've just reverted our old fixes in favour of upstream's.
Woo, congrats!
May you please update #6840 ("Upstream our Tor Launcher changes") so
that one can get its current status without having to read the entire
comments thread? I suggest creating a subtask for each bugfix or
feature that was not merged upstream yet.
> For the review, the commit in Tails' Git isn't very interesting, since
> it corresponds to the imported package.
Slightly OT (and we already had a thread about it, see #7036):
I'm a bit sad not to see progress on #7087 ("Do not bundle Tor
Launcher in the main Tails Git repository"). Three months ago, back
when this was merged for 0.23, our agreement was that this was a very
temporary thing, only justified by the bridges support work being
completed super-late in that release cycle, and 1.0 being
a point-release.
OTOH, I'm still unsure what the best way would be to resolve this
problem (the more general ticket about it being #7036), so I really
can't blame you for this :) I was once sold to submodules, but later
read that they have a whole bunch of problems of their own, e.g.
in the merges handling. I'm more and more convinced this general
problem could be an important one to tackle for 2.0 or 3.0, as part of
making our workflow a bit smoother.
> The relevant changes in our Tor
> Launcher git are 7fa3b70..2ebf1db. The non-reverts introduced by "Tails
> developers" are patches that were upstreamed; the revert:s (and merge of
> ttp/masteR) by "Tails developers" are the only things I've done in our
> repo. Sorry that this has become this confusing...
Indeed, it's getting very hard (especially when combined with how
#6840 looks) to get what the status of our delta is. I'd rather not
see this get worse and worse any longer. May you please save the
history of our current master branch (e.g. as "old-master"), and
rebase it on top of current upstream's master, dropping everything
that was merged upstream, the corresponding reverts, and all
merge commits?
Once this is done, and the status of #6840 is updated, I'm happy to
merge this branch. It looks good to me, and my quick testing didn't
expose any issue.
Cheers!
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
