[Guy Harris <gharris@xxxxxxxxx>]

Joerg Mayer wrote:

> OK, we don't include the Suse and FC spec files+patches either, so why
> make an exception for Debian? OTOH, I'd actually like to see the distro
> specific stuff in svn  - at least for those distros that are currently still
> supported by their vendors. But I guess that I'm quite alone with that
> wish.

(Note that "distribution" here should include any packager of Ethereal, 
even if they're not a Linux distribution.)

I have no problem with distribution-specific spec files and other files 
(e.g., ethereal-root.desktop) in SVN...

...as long as

	1) *WE* own that stuff and can change it, even if that means it differs 
from what the vendors have

and

	2) *THEY* pick up *OUR* code and use it.

If we're just storing Somebody Else's Stuff, I don't see why we don't 
just leave it up to them to provide it.

The patches are a different matter.  Either

	1) a patch is a correct fix to a problem in the current version of the 
software, in which case it should be applied;

	2) a patch is an incorrect fix to a problem in the current version of 
the software, in which case we should figure out a correct fix and make 
that fix;

	3) a patch is a fix to a problem that's already been fixed in the 
current version of the software, in which case we should ignore the patch;

	4) a patch adds a useful feature not in the current version of the 
software, in which case it should be applied (although we might have to 
generalize it so that it works on other platforms, or at least doesn't 
break things on those platforms).

In none of those cases should we just supply the raw version of the patch.