On 10/10/14 15:31, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote: > Here is one: > 1) Don't check the type of the atoms. Just output inside the loop using > outlet_list That way you don't have to care if there happen to be other > types of atoms (like gpointers, blobs, etc.)
Good tip, thanks! I took my cue from other Pd objects like "pack" and "spigot" here and I thought this was closest to what Miller might want. I may well be wrong though! I guess I'll find out if my trivial patch is ever looked at. > To complete it in 10 mins: > 1) git diff filename.pd > whatever.patch I use the method suggested on puredata.info which is `git format-patch HEAD^` and captures all of the changes I have made, but same thing basically. Note that a git format-patch also includes git meta information meaning when Miller merges it it goes in as if it was a commit to his branch made by you. You didn't have the step in here for updating the help patch. > 2) submitting patch to tracker == emailing Miller and list (if not then > you must have left something out of your general outline of free > software dev process) This is part of my point. In the past when I have just submitted a patch to the tracker it often doesn't get noticed. Hans gave me a tip that if I email Miller directly with the patch and ask his opinion etc. I am much more likely to get it looked at. This turned out to be true, which is why I include that step separately in what I wrote. Puredata.info seems to be down right now but once it is back up I will add my preaching points to whatever wiki they best belong in. Cheers, Chris. -- http://mccormick.cx/ _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list