On 1/18/11, Dagobert Michelsen <[email protected]> wrote: >.... >> Wasnt the whole point of having the auto-git stuff in gar, to make >> small patches like that trivial? > > I won't make this kind of patch. If I fix it I do it right. That means > moving the documentation to autoconf substitution. There are already > too many patches I have to take care of on upstream bumps. If upstream > not already has done the autoconf-integration my patches probably > won't get accepted anyway. >
Do you not see rather large irony there? "[I care strongly about making the best quality packages! Why is why I'm not going to improve the quality of my packages!]" There's nothing particularly "wrong" about doing a file-specific patch for this sort of thing. (quickie substitution of /opt/csw for /usr/local, in .info files) Yes, it would be "nice" for the open software community at large, if someone were to fully patch the autoconf stuff to update docs based on --prefix cleanly. But OUR community of users, should be more important than the global community of open software. If there's a choice between making *our* users happy Right Now, even if the larger community is left out, vs "well, Someone will do a Nice fix, Someday".... That becomes a choice between making our users happy, or making noone happy. Please spend the extra 5 minutes to make *our* users happier? _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
