Op 24-6-2011 23:39, Dennis E. Hamilton schreef:
It helps if patches are in-line in the mail note. (That way, EOL differences
are compensated for and those of us with an MS-DOS mentality don't have to save
the attachment to disk to find a way to view it correctly.)
- Dennis
PS: I guess I
On Jun 25, 2011 5:58 AM, Dick Groskamp th.grosk...@quicknet.nl wrote:
Op 24-6-2011 23:39, Dennis E. Hamilton schreef:
It helps if patches are in-line in the mail note. (That way, EOL
differences are compensated for and those of us with an MS-DOS mentality
don't have to save the attachment to
, June 25, 2011 04:37
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Corrected two typos on website
On Jun 25, 2011 5:58 AM, Dick Groskamp th.grosk...@quicknet.nl wrote:
Op 24-6-2011 23:39, Dennis E. Hamilton schreef:
It helps if patches are in-line in the mail note. (That way, EOL
Op 24-6-2011 20:18, Marcus (OOo) schreef:
Thanks for the fix. :-)
As I don't know yet how to add a patch to SVN, I've corrected the text
directly. I hope it's OK for you. Of course I've mentioned you in the
commit message.
Marcus
No problem. Just stumbled over them when I was playing with
Good job, both.
My little mystery was trying to figure out why SVN was not letting me
apply the patch. Then I figured it out. The patch had already been
applied. ;-)
Perhaps a convention in the future would be that the committer who
wants to review and merge a patch first claims the patch on
Better to let subversion resolve coordination problems than to put up
obstructions to jfdi, IMO.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 24, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Rob Weir apa...@robweir.com wrote:
Good job, both.
My little mystery was trying to figure out why SVN was not letting me
apply the patch. Then I
How? By locking the files that are being patched while doing the
review? Would that have really told the 2nd reviewer anything?
Locking only prevents me from committing by working copy. It doesn't
prevent me from applying a patch to my working copy, right?
-Rob
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:31
I thought about this. But it was a 5 second thing, so I just did it and
said it then.
OK; next time the other way round. ;-)
Marcus
Am 06/24/2011 08:26 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
Good job, both.
My little mystery was trying to figure out why SVN was not letting me
apply the patch. Then I
have no conflicts to
deal with and like the diff, then recommit.
- Original Message
From: Rob Weir apa...@robweir.com
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Fri, June 24, 2011 2:41:15 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Corrected two typos on website
How? By locking the files that are being
OK. I just looked up JFDI. ;-)
Let me explain why I brought this up. In this particular case, yes,
JDFI. No big deal. But if it were a more complicated patch, one that
took a more substantial amount of time to review, build and test, say
30 minutes, then it would be really annoying to have 4
history of the files in question to
see if someone else beat them to it.
- Original Message
From: Rob Weir apa...@robweir.com
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Fri, June 24, 2011 2:47:23 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Corrected two typos on website
OK. I just looked up JFDI
It helps if patches are in-line in the mail note. (That way, EOL differences
are compensated for and those of us with an MS-DOS mentality don't have to save
the attachment to disk to find a way to view it correctly.)
- Dennis
PS: I guess I should find a way to change my default *.txt viewer
Larger patches typically have some level of review, and during that
conversation you will generally see somebody take interest in the
patch. As Joe said, it is a social convention that generally works
itself out without a person needing to claim a patch.
And if four days go by, and nobody has
13 matches
Mail list logo
