Re: auctex: to submit or not to submit that is the question.
>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen J Turnbull
<stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Uwe Brauer writes:
> I therefore propose to apply the XEmacs.rules patch *before* I
> submit.
We cannot review the XEmacs.rules patch without seeing the code that
it is intended to support. It is almost as important to keep unneeded
cruft out of the codebase as it is to add needed features. So you are
saying we should apply an unreviewed patch. That's not right; we
wouldn't do it for any other maintainer, either.
Right, I understand. I am only afraid of submitting something for
which I know, it will *not* work.
I've looked at the auto-autoload.el diff and do not understand
why
achieving this effect needs changes to XEmacs.rules. The review is
made more difficult because it appears that the diff is reversed, and
there are other changes besides those that would be explained by the
patch to XEmacs.rules (of course I can't be sure of that because I
don't have access to the code that generates the difference).
BTW, most XEmacs reviewers prefer "diff -u" as the format
for
differences. (Put the line "diff -u" in ~/.cvsrc on Unix systems to
have cvs diff use that format automatically. There should be a
similar feature for Windows.)
Ok, I did now a
diff -u NOpatch2/lisp/auctex/auto-autoloads.el
Patch/lisp/auctex/auto-autoloads.el > auto-autoloads.el.diffu
I also have added to my local apache server (I hope you can access)
the following files
- this diff file
- the tgz packages of the new auctex src directory.
- the Xemacs_pkg generated *without* the XEmacs.rules patch
- the Xemacs_pkg generated *with* the XEmacs.rules patch
The links is
http://147.96.6.137/Xemacs_pkg/
Please tell me your opinion before I submit.
Uwe Brauer
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta