>>>> "APA" == Adrian Aichner
>>>> "Klaus" == Klaus Berndl <Berndl>
Klaus> To be more precise here: Of course i could generate patches
Klaus> which are simply diffs between the old-version (contained
Klaus> in the package-version <next> - 1) and the new version
Klaus> (contained in the forthcoming release as a XEmacs-package).
APA> I think this would be valuable.
It _is_ really useful to know exactly what was applied on occasion.
Klaus> But this will be often really large diffs/patches.
APA> I just did cvs diff -N -D 2003-03-24 xemacs-packages\ecb and
APA> the resulting patch is 160KB.
Which is not a terribly big patch. xemacs-patches will happily
If you really prefer, an alternative would be to CVS tag, apply and
commit the changes, and then CVS tag again, and put a reference to the
tags in the ChangeLog. You really do need to tag specifically around
your patch because XEmacs maintainers will make various changes, some
trivial like bumping VERSION in the Makefile, but at other times they
may fix bugs and stuff, and it's very important to know which fixes
are done by XEmacs and which by upstream.
However, as Adrian points out people can and do search xemacs-patches
archives for a particular line to see if it has been changed.
Without precise ChangeLogs it's hard to catch changes in function
definitions (as our standard patch format does not include the
function name), unfortunately. As an alternative to precise
ChangeLogs, you might consider using the -p flag (if cvs diff supports
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.