#9419: Update Developers Guide to state how patches should be made.
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
   Reporter:  drkirkby       |          Owner:  mvngu                     
       Type:  enhancement    |         Status:  new                       
   Priority:  major          |      Milestone:  sage-4.7.1                
  Component:  documentation  |       Keywords:  patch doc howto spkgs diff
Work_issues:                 |       Upstream:  N/A                       
   Reviewer:                 |         Author:                            
     Merged:                 |   Dependencies:                            
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Changes (by leif):

  * keywords:  patch doc => patch doc howto spkgs diff


Comment:

 Also, the ''Developer's Guide'' should state how to check the exit code(s)
 of `patch`, i.e. '''we should IMHO test `$?` of ''every'' application of
 `patch`''' (cf.
 [http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11246#comment:21 my comment
 here]):

  ''[...] Fortunately, we now use `patch` rather than `cp`, which at least
 spits out warning or error messages in case upstream and `patches/*` get
 out of sync (or someone made another mistake), but these messages are
 easily missed - even by a reviewer, which can lead to all kinds of obscure
 errors or misbehavior '''any time later''', so we should IMHO check `$?`
 there. [...]''

 If we apply many patches in a loop (which I don't really like since this
 badly documents ''what'' is actually patched ''why'', but see
 documentation-related discussion above), we should at least "accumulate"
 the outcome, i.e. test once all patches were successfully applied.

 We could even check if they applied seamlessly, without fuzz (which I
 think should be the case in spkgs; otherwise they should get rebased).

 Opinions?

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9419#comment:10>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.

Reply via email to