[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Official sources vs. RCVS

From: Derek R. Price
Subject: Re: Official sources vs. RCVS
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:04:27 -0500

"Cameron, Steve" wrote:

> Karl Fogel wrote:
> > But the majority of patches received don't fit these qualifications.
> > This isn't meant to be some sort of off-putting, elitist statement,
> > and I hope it doesn't sound that way -- the same thing can be said of
> > 90% of the patches sent to 90% of the free software projects in the
> > world.
>         [smc]  Part of the (perceived) problem might be that for those 90%
>         of the patches that fail to live up to the standards, there is
> generally
>         not much, if any, constructive criticism, or that's been my
> experience

Any immediate thoughts on Steve's .trunk/.origin patch if I do the initial
review & testing?  I will post my thoughts after review and testing and
before applying, regardless.


P.S. He posted the wrong link to his patch this time around.  It's actually

Derek Price                      CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:address@hidden     OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com )
"If triangles had a God, He'd have three sides."

                        -- Old Yiddish Proverb

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]