I think we should distinguish two types of patches: There are obvious patches, which a maintainer would commit without waiting for discussion on the mailing list, and which don't need more than a one line comment of explanation. For those, the procedure described by Gunnar below is a lot faster, and I maintain that it is also better than using patches.html (it can never happen that the link from the Trac Changelog differs from the actually committed patch, for example).
Gunnar wrote: > With patches.html, only patch name in commit message: > a) cvs commit -m "patch name" > b) cvs update patches.html > c) Add link, patch name, and describing text in patches.html > d) cvs commit patches.html > > With trac, patch name and describing text in commit message: > a) cvs commit -m "patch name, describing text" Then there are patches that potentially need discussion: > To see how these differ in functionality and work, consider for 1 the > case that someone submits a patch to the mailing list which we want to > list as pending. > > With patches.html: > a) Wait until it has reached the archive. > b) Locate the URL in the archive. > c) cvs update patches.html > d) Add the archive link and a description in patches.html > e) cvs commit patches.html > > With trac, alternative 1: > a) Wait until it has reached the archive. > b) Locate the URL in the archive. > c) Click on new ticket. > d) Fill in the ticket, including link to mail archive in description. > e) Click on submit ticket. > > With these use cases there's a similar amount of work but I would say > that trac is slightly faster. There's a major difference however; with > patches.html only the maintainers can do the work, with trac anyone > can do it, in particular the submitter of the patch. I would add that the ticket can be automatically referenced from the trac log by using a cvs commit message like "patch name, #55". This means that for applying the patch, we one just needs to do a) cvs commit -m "..." b) close the trac ticket instead of, with patches.html a) cvs commit -m "..." b) cvs update patches.html c) move patch from pending to applied d) cvs commit patches.html I am pretty happy with trac so far and share Gunnar's opinion on patches.html. Arend _______________________________________________ gnugo-devel mailing list gnugo-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnugo-devel
