Moved to XEmacs Beta, it's a policy clarification.
>>>> "Chris" == Chris Palmer
<chris(a)nodewarrior.org> writes:
> For what it's worth, I copied the #define
> GC_CHECK_NOT_FREE... line to a place outside of any #ifdef
> things, and the build completed successfully.
Chris> Here is a blatantly wrong patch. It's enough to demonstrate
Chris> the problem and fix my build, but nothing more. :)
Chris, if the patch is blatantly wrong, or even quite possibly not
good enough, please send it to xemacs-beta, not xemacs-patches.
xemacs-patches is for patches that (at least in your opinion) should
be applied as is to the distribution (ie, CVS) sources. It also
records the reviewers' workflow.
OTOH, on xemacs-beta it will get more discussion. Eg, obviously the
person who committed that patch is not building in your configuration;
in this case it's a generic configure --use-kkcc=NO bug and in theory
he could have caught it, but suppose it were dependent on MacOS?
Right now I think only one reviewer is building regularly on MacOS,
and IIRC he's more interested in the new Carbon stuff than the Darwin
platform.
Also, if your patch were to actually cause trouble in some configs,
but allowed some testers to build who otherwise couldn't, they'll more
likely see it on xemacs-beta. Nowadays, most testers don't follow
xemacs-patches; it's more convenient to put a cvs update in cron once
a day.
--
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences
http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.