Of course there are good reasons to do something or not to do something, but my 
concern is I would like to have A+B+C. Now my choice is A or B or C, unless I 
spend time to look every changes carefully and manually merge them into the 
code.

Regards,

JF
--- On Thu, 9/11/08, Bert Wesarg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> From: Bert Wesarg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] consolidate macro ops
> To: "NEdit development list" <[email protected]>
> Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008, 12:29 PM
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 16:59, John Ferrier
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Does this patch contain your previous "PATCH
> v3" and " PATCH skip indirection for NUMBER
> tokens"? Can you confirm this?
> No, I would have mentioned it. ;-)
> 
> I post mostly independent patches. The dependency in
> "PATCH skip
> indirection for NUMBER tokens" (the patch itself is
> called
> pushImmed.patch) was pure laziness on my side. Each patch
> is based on
> current CVS head, if not otherwise mentioned.
> 
> >
> > do you have a patch based on your ""PATCH
> v3" and "PATCH skip indirection for NUMBER
> tokens"?
> No, but I have patches for parse-define.patch and
> pushImmed.patch
> based on this consolidate-ops.patch.
> 
> You find them here:
> 
> http://repo.or.cz/w/nedit-bw.git
> 
> This is a git repo of my quilt queue.
> 
> If you are familiar with these two programs it should be
> straight
> forward to use this repo.
> 
> If not I could and will provide simple instructions how to
> use this.
> 
> Regards
> Bert
> 
> >
> > Thx,
> >
> > JF
> -- 
> NEdit Develop mailing list - [email protected]
> http://www.nedit.org/mailman/listinfo/develop


      
-- 
NEdit Develop mailing list - [email protected]
http://www.nedit.org/mailman/listinfo/develop

Reply via email to