> What is the current preference among the POI committers and community?
Receiving a patch: I haven't checked how to receive the git pull requests as I'm not having a local POI git repository - so this is currently my least preferred format. Apart of that, I don't care if approach 1 or 2 is used or if everything is in a .zip or uploaded in separated files - if the description of a bug sounds interesting when I only have mobile access, I'll take my time in the evening to check it ... usually I need more time with a patch (adding tests, merge with the meanwhile changed trunk ...) anyway. Producing a patch: It depends ... if it includes binaries, I'm more likely using ant to package everything, but then need to manually change the patch.txt to remove stuff, which I don't like to be in there, e.g. eclipse settings/source references ... (now that I think about it, I've probably should simply change the patch.xml to exclude those files ...) If no binaries are there, I'm creating the patch files from eclipse. > If we want to stick with ant as the recommended approach, could we do > something to address: ... I'm "0" on this ... although I check the svn commits (via Jenkins) every now and then, I don't mind either approach for reviewing ... usually I prefer to have less restrictions (in this case for users to provide code) to regulations ... (exemptions apply ...) Andi. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
