Adam Sjøgren writes:
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 00:01:04 +0100, Mats wrote:
> I suggest that you provide a patch, eg. changeset, with ChangeLog and
> all to possibly get some more attention. If you can, use patcher to
> construct the mail. Send it to xemacs-patches. Mark is with [AC21.5].
I understand that it is nice to have people use your specialized tools
and workflows to submit patches.
Patcher is not a specialized tool. It's a generic tool that (I
imagine) was developed with XEmacs in mind, but it works for *any*
The requirements are
(1) context diffs (diff -c is OK, diff -u is better, hg diff is best)
(2) except for ChangeLogs, where plain text or diff -U 0 is required
(otherwise you're almost guaranteed a failed patch application)
(3) send it to xemacs-patches(a)xemacs.org if the patch works for you,
unless you know there's a good reason it should *not* be applied
(patches sent to xemacs-beta are assumed to be not ready to be
applied; when in doubt, send to xemacs-patches or both).
I don't see anything unusual or difficult there, unless you've never
contributed to any project on the 'net before. The suggestion to use
patcher is because that after you configure it for XEmacs once, (1),
(2), and (3) are automatic. You don't have to use patcher, though (I
don't, at the moment, my configurations all broke when I rearranged my
home directory a few months ago; OK, so some dummies like me have to
configure it twice :-).
I had hoped for one of two outcomes: Someone either says "Yeah,
good fix", or says "No, it should be done in this way instead", and
either commits it with the appropriate extra bits and bobs, or says I
should submit the suggested, corrected solution through the proper channels.
That's a reasonable hope, and what normally happens with Linux-
oriented or platform-independent contributions. But in this case
perhaps a bit optimistic, as this is a rather technical detail, and we
don't have active OpenBSD-based developers at this point. I know that
Aidan did some work on it years ago, but I don't think it's a usual
platform for him.
That is, you're probably the best expert we've got. :-) And yes, I
know what I'm saying. :-)
As a green newcomer, I don't want to learn - and go through - all
hoops to send a patch only to have someone say that it should have been
fixed in a slightly different way.
You don't have to learn them. The only folks who *have* to learn them
are the reviewers.
But if the patch is undocumented (minimum of a ChangeLog entry), or it
doesn't apply, or it is directed to the wrong list, it is less likely
to get the attention it deserves. And every project I've ever worked
on works that way; some are much more formal. We're not going to
deliberately ignore your patch, but with no expertise on that
platform, everybody is hoping for somebody else to do something. I
know I'm hoping Aidan will, because I don't expect to have time to
work on code I don't understand until Christmastime. :-)
XEmacs-Beta mailing list