Re: Current state of 3.1.2

Re: Current state of 3.1.2

[Wez Furlong]

Er, I don't seem to have received my previous post (from the list) about
a zsh with the current patches. I suspect this is because they are
'upgrading' the mailer here at york. I have also 'lost' some mail as a
result.

If anyone posted a reply to my previous message with a source for the
source of zsh with the current patches, please re-send it.

Thanks.



-- 
Wez - Electronics Undergraduate at the University of York
URL : http://www.twinklestar.demon.co.uk/

Insult Of The Day: Thou lumpish ill-nurtured boar-pig!

Current state of 3.1.2

[Wez Furlong]

Hi,

Does anyone have a 'clean' version of zsh 3.1.2 with all the 'official'
patches applied? I have had problems with my email and missed many
patches.

If you have it, please email me.

Thanks.



-- 
Wez - Electronics Undergraduate at the University of York
URL : http://www.twinklestar.demon.co.uk/

Insult Of The Day: Thou ruttish shard-borne clack-dish!

Re: Current state of 3.1.2

[Bruce Stephens]

wjf103@york.ac.uk said:
> Does anyone have a 'clean' version of zsh 3.1.2 with all the 
> 'official' patches applied? I have had problems with my email and 
> missed many patches. 

Is there such a thing as an official patch?  This would be really useful, 
though.  Perhaps keep the zsh-RCS.tar.gz up to date, assuming Zoltan has such 
a thing himself?  (With the caveat that sometimes this would be broken, but 
hackers can live with that.)  Or use some kind of distributed CVS setup, as 
some projects are said to do, where a select group has modify access, but the 
rest of us just get to watch; that's probably more effort than it's worth, 
though.

Perhaps there could be some way of archiving just the patches posted to 
zsh-workers, in an order that they could be applied to the latest test 
version? This would typically just involve those sending patches to put an 
indication in the header of their mail ("Subject: PATCH ...", or something), 
with the occasional intervention needed when people supply incompatible 
patches.

zsh-workers is archived, of course, but last time I tried, it was non-trivial 
to find the patches.

Re: Current state of 3.1.2

[Timothy J Luoma]

	Author:        Bruce Stephens <B.Stephens@isode.com>
	Original-Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 15:43:38 +0100
	Message-ID:    <199710081443.KAA27464@math.gatech.edu>

> Perhaps there could be some way of archiving just the patches posted to
> zsh-workers, in an order that they could be applied to the latest test
> version? This would typically just involve those sending patches to put an 
> indication in the header of their mail ("Subject: PATCH ...", or
> something), with the occasional intervention needed when people supply
> incompatible patches.

Maybe I can chime in here.

It would be child's play for me to set this up somewhere under the ZSH web  
page @ PEAK.org (http://www.peak.org/zsh/).  I already have an email-2-html  
setup there.

The easiest way would be if we could agree to send patches to 'zsh@peak.org'  
(another address for me).  That way no one has to remember any special  
Subjects and it would be easy enough to do (just CC that address when you  
send in a patch).
	Upside: no non-Patches would show up, trivial to maintain
	Downside: if you don't remember to send it there, it doesn't get
		added

If it was deemed better to use a certain Subject: header such as PATCH that  
would be fine too
	Upside: only have to remember one address
	Downside: have to remember the right Subject header
	
		TjL