On Sunday 13 December 2009 23:33:19 SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > However, there are several reasons why we cannot accept the patch: > > > > 1. It is some 3200 lines of changes and we are essentially in a release > > freeze at this point where no nonessential patches are accepted (new code > > in development by developers is being kept in their private branches for > > committing after the next release). > > The regular freeze is fine. My update suggestion can be enqueued for a > future software release.
OK. > > > 2. Your patch completely deletes the current autoconf.in file, which > > means that we are not able to see what actual changes were made. Well, > > we could apply it then diff ourselves, but it is really not the way we > > like to work. > > You can still look at the previous update file. As I said, the previous file had syntax errors. > > > 3. You have moved configure.in from <bacula>/autoconf to <bacula> and > > there is no reason to do so. It only serves to "pollute" the main > > directory, which can confuse users. > > I have got the experience that the command "autoreconf" is looking for > configuration templates in the project directory. We do not use autoreconf, nor do I know what it does. If it is something that is important, then the command must be fixed. > > > 4. Even if we were ready to accept it, you have sent a patch that you > > have not rebased on our master, which means that it is out of date and > > because of the change of directory will introduce errors into the > > configure. > > I suggested changes on the base of your repository that I cloned in > November. Well, the repository has been modified many times since then, so before submitting anything in the future, please be sure to do a rebase. > > > Rather than making modifications to existing code that works, we would > > much rather receive a few bug fixes, then when development is going full > > steam (a couple months after the next release) we would be more open to > > larger cleanups. > > I am curious if more configuration script adjustments will happen in the > next year. I do not understand the above sentence. Perhaps you mean "will configuration script changes be permitted". The answer is yes, providing they are necessary and they are not thousands of lines at a time. We are not prepared to add massive changes that just rewrite the code without adding new features. We will accept small patches that clean up old or out of date code. Kern ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
