From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8435 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2000 06:27:07 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 4 Apr 2000 06:27:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 7358 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2000 06:26:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 10450 Received: (qmail 7351 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2000 06:26:58 -0000 X-Envelope-Sender-Is: Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru (at relayer david.siemens.de) From: "Andrej Borsenkow" To: "Bart Schaefer" , Subject: RE: PATCH: 3.1.6-dev-20: _dpkg thinko Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 10:26:45 +0400 Message-ID: <000701bf9dfe$c0072150$21c9ca95@mow.siemens.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 In-Reply-To: <000403101052.ZM19390@candle.brasslantern.com> Importance: Normal > > > > Should I submit this to the Patch Manager? > > I was actually wondering how whether and how well the "recent patches" > archive on www.zsh.org/mla/ is automated. Could we arrange > for zsh-list > patches to go straight into the sourceforge patch manager? > The problem is, half (at least) of all patches do not have PATCH: prefix. And I think, we should distinguish between - CVS commits - user submitted patches It is hard to intermix them ... CVS commits depend on other patches and mostly cannot be applied to clean version while with user's patches it is exactly other way round - they probably need modification/merging to apply to current CVS. Somehow I'm getting the feeling that "patch archive" is not as useful at all ... -andrej