On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:11:48 +0200, Georg Brandl wrote:
> Am 27.07.2010 10:54, schrieb David:
> > I'd welcome any patch submitted to Rietveld for review. However, your
> > proposed "review.py" module does not exist as far as I know, and unless
> > someone writes it, it won't.
> >
> >
Am 27.07.2010 10:54, schrieb David:
> I'd welcome any patch submitted to Rietveld for review. However, your
>
> proposed "review.py" module does not exist as far as I know, and unless
> someone writes it, it won't.
>
>
> Haven't personally tested that it works with Rietveld due to l
>
> I'd welcome any patch submitted to Rietveld for review. However, your
>
proposed "review.py" module does not exist as far as I know, and unless
> someone writes it, it won't.
>
Haven't personally tested that it works with Rietveld due to lack of patches
sitting around, but cursory investigati
Am 26.07.2010 22:18, schrieb anatoly techtonik:
> Small introduction for insiders not familiar with outsider's problem
> of maintaining patches in tracker. Please forgive the tone I write
> about things I dislike, but I am not devoting my life to earn a title
> of polite bastard (this one is oblig
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 23:18:05 +0300, anatoly techtonik
wrote:
> > python -m review
>
> and allows you to:
>
> 1. Create issue for patch review on Rietveld site
> 2. Run "svn diff"
> 3. Upload the patch
> 4. Supply comment for the patch
>
> everything above in one step. To upload an updated patc
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 15:18, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> http://bugs.python.org/issue9376
> This issue discussed docs on the proper way to create diff on windows
> (as it is doesn't have the tool) for sending the patch. The current
> proper way is to use "svn diff" which will be replaced with "hg
