My main answer would be that it's not really a big deal. It's all just clear and efficient communication that we're after, right? Do what works. (If it turns out that I'm wrong about this and that there is a reason that this matters, we should update our guides :-))
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 11:38:49 +0200, [email protected] wrote: > I amended and re-sent. And just curious now: In a case like this, > would it be better to re-edit and create a completely new patch, > throwing away the original? As opposed to amending? I don't see it would make a difference (except for the slight bit of technical wobble in the diffs that Ganesh pointed out, but in most cases, non-issue) > And if this was done, should the new patch get a different name or > could the name of the earlier patch be re-used? No particular need for it to get a new name even if you did that. Just let us know what happened and we can sleuth our way through should anything go wrong. -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
pgp1SMoconsnp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
