Again, used the wrong e-mail adddress... Please see the forwarded message below.
Begin forwarded message: > Resent-From: Justin <[email protected]> > From: [email protected] > Date: February 25, 2010 11:11:03 AM EST > Resent-To: Justin Obara <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Patch for testing My Collection send email parameters > > Thank you for posting to the fluid-work mailing list. Unfortunately, > we are unable to post your message because you are not a member of the > list. Please join the fluid-work mailing list > (http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work) and repost your > message, or contact the list administrators > [email protected] for help. > > > > From: Justin <[email protected]> > Date: February 25, 2010 10:37:08 AM EST > To: Svetoslav Nedkov <[email protected]> > Cc: Colin Clark <[email protected]>, Fluid Work > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Patch for testing My Collection send email parameters > > > Hi Sveto, > > Thanks for the patch. Right now we are only making commits that affect what > we need to get done for performance. So don't be surprised or worried if it > takes a couple of weeks to get reviewed and committed. > > On 2010-02-25, at 7:02 AM, Svetoslav Nedkov wrote: > >> Also I have a question about the best approach for creating patches >> modifying the same code - this seems to limit the possibility to work on two >> issues before the first one is resolved. So the only solution I could think >> of was to create two patches for patch B created after patch A over the same >> code base - one that is supposed to be applied after patch A and one that >> could be applied separately without the changes from A. This will involve >> implementing the changes twice. Can you advise on that issue? > > I'm not exactly sure what you mean by same code. Do you mean in the same file > or for example the same function? > > I defer to Colin on this one. He's reviewed and submitted far more patches > than I have. However, I think in general though it would be better if patches > were self contained, non-conflicting and no dependencies between them. So > neither A nor B should contain the same changes. I understand that this may > not always be possible, so in those circumstances creating two patches for > the same issue may be the appropriate solution. But again, Colin may have > some more insight into this. > > Hope I've helped somewhat. > JustinHi Sveto, > > Thanks for the patch. Right now we are only making commits that affect what > we need to get done for performance. So don't be surprised or worried if it > takes a couple of weeks to get reviewed and committed. > > On 2010-02-25, at 7:02 AM, Svetoslav Nedkov wrote: > >> Also I have a question about the best approach for creating patches >> modifying the same code - this seems to limit the possibility to work on two >> issues before the first one is resolved. So the only solution I could think >> of was to create two patches for patch B created after patch A over the same >> code base - one that is supposed to be applied after patch A and one that >> could be applied separately without the changes from A. This will involve >> implementing the changes twice. Can you advise on that issue? > > I'm not exactly sure what you mean by same code. Do you mean in the same file > or for example the same function? > > I defer to Colin on this one. He's reviewed and submitted far more patches > than I have. However, I think in general though it would be better if patches > were self contained, non-conflicting and no dependencies between them. So > neither A nor B should contain the same changes. I understand that this may > not always be possible, so in those circumstances creating two patches for > the same issue may be the appropriate solution. But again, Colin may have > some more insight into this. > > Hope I've helped somewhat. > Justin >
_______________________________________________________ fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
