On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel <[email protected]> wrote:
> > This list runs with standard defaults of Mailman, a popular choice for > running mailing list, as set up by R-Forge. > > In particular, message limits are 40kb. Larger messages are held and then > create admin work. Yesterday, an attempt to send a 90kb message got > rejected, > and I as list owner got the bounce. The message (according to its body) > claimed to contain "patches" to source code in Rcpp, yet it looked like it > contained full copies of the files. > It appears that the post got through in spite of the "rejection"? At any rate, I tried to submit these changes three times, first a list of changes spelled out so that Rcpp would compile using MSVC. Then as a private correspondence to Romain who said he would ignore the submission because it was not posted to the list. And finally as a post to this list, which resulted in my contributions being rejected. These changes consist of just a few small changes to existing code (all ifdef-ed _MSC_VER so they have no impact on CRAN builds), and three new files. Obviously I cannot generate context diffs for new files, and the trivial changes to existing files can be found by grep-ing for _MSC_VER. Dominick > Just like any other open source project, we prefer _patches_ (and see [1] > if > you are unclear as to what these are -- they are not _modified copies_) > rather than copies. If you want us to consider your work, the onus is on > you > to demonstrate a) what goal the change is meant to achieve and b) to > clearly > delineate what changes are to be made. Patches do the latter, whereas > copies > don't. Additional info on the motivation for the patch (clearer code, > better > performance, more foo, ...) also helps. > > I would suggest a single patch set (ie output from diff possibly pertaining > to several files but one "logical" chunk) per email message so that the > patch > can be reviewed here. The patch should preferably be against the current > SVN > trunk as we as Rcpp authors tend not to work in branches. We also tend not > to set, but commit logs clearly identify which revisions correspond to the > actual tar ball releases. > > Thanks, Dirk > > > [1] > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patch_(Unix)<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patch_%28Unix%29> > > -- > Dirk Eddelbuettel | [email protected] | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com > _______________________________________________ > Rcpp-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rcpp-devel >
_______________________________________________ Rcpp-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rcpp-devel
