On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Colin Watson<[email protected]> wrote: > I guess I'm a glutton for punishment today since y'all seem to have > completely different approaches to things than I do
This is sort of typical to have different approaches. However, your patches *are* accepted. Why do you complain? You want them to be accepted in exactly the form you proposed? In my experience, it usually is much worse than that in many projects: I send a patch and it gets ignored or rejected on some non-technical grounds. Best case is when I work on creating the patch for a day and then it takes weeks or months to get it applied. That's what I call "punishment". > based on comments on > my patches, but hey, this one causes zero size change according to > bloatcheck so maybe we can agree on this! ;-) You did not include a bloatcheck output. Please resubmit. Just kidding. That would be a classic answer from e.g. run of the mill GNU project. I once got "Your changelog does not have two spaces between date and your name". Applied, thanks. Then I renamed old option GETOPT_LONG to LONG_OPTS, it matches the meaning closer and does not look so similar to your ENABLE_FEATURE_GETOPT_LONG. -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
