On 4 August 2012 11:14, Matthew Brush <mbr...@codebrainz.ca> wrote: > On 12-08-03 05:58 PM, Lex Trotman wrote: >> >> >> I thought the Git branch was Eugenes and he already said it could be >> removed?? >> > > See below. > > >> If my memory is right, then removing it and applying the patch to a >> "new_sm" branch would be the way to go. >> > > I pushed the libsm patch from the patch tracker to a new Git branch[1] a > couple weeks ago or so, expecting to be getting emails from sf.net when the > patch tracker was updated to queue me to apply the latest patch to the Git > branch. > > IMO, it makes more sense to maintain it as a branch (or merging into the > master branch) in the Git repository, even thought the patch tracker item is > meticulously well documented/commented/updated. If Dimitar doesn't mind > working on the Git repo instead of keeping a sf.net patch tracker item up to > date, I'd be +1 for that.
Ah, missed that one :) So totally agree, Dimitar should be given rights to maintain this instead of the patch if he wants to. Cheers Lex > > Cheers, > Matthew Brush > > [1] > https://github.com/geany/geany/commit/0f07b31aa866f92dcbaf29659ead7beab60a1dde > > _______________________________________________ > Geany-devel mailing list > Geany-devel@uvena.de > https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
