On Jul 12, 2013, at 11:34 PM, Tor Arntsen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 12 July 2013 15:18, Ryan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Upon further examination, I see that the patch is quite trivial and not >> worth any fuss. But to an initial observer, saying you're submitting an >> untested patch sounds a bit sketchy to me. You obviously have a different >> opinion. > > I hope you realize that the alternative would have been no patch? > Patrick maintains target platforms that the other developers on this > list don't have access to. So the alternative to provide an untested > patch would be to not provide anything. > This is a list where developers interchange patches forth and back and > we keep massaging them until they're good. This is how it works, not > only on this list (you should try to check out the Git mailing list, > for example. Every idea is typically followed by a tentative patch to > start the discussion going. Sometimes dozens a day). Presenting a > patch on this list is not the same as posting a fix to play.google.com > or windows update: It's not an end-user patch. Obviously if posting a > patch to the library with the intent of fixing a bug observed by > oneself you'll try to make it as good as possible from the start. In > this case Yang helped to fix a problem in the test framework, not the > library (important difference), by providing a patch showing the way. > Not necessarily the final, best version, but where it should be > heading (i.e. use curlx_strdup()). Ah, thank you for your explanation. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding and I will keep this in mind for the future. Ryan > > -Tor > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library > Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html ------------------------------------------------------------------- List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
