Re: use Savannah more aggresisvely

[Jeremy Katz]

On Tue, 2002-05-28 at 18:16, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> At Wed, 29 May 2002 06:55:05 +0900,
> Yoshinori K. Okuji <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > Patches is a little harder, because I like being able to comment on
> > > patches inline.  Then again, with the mails being sent, if the patch is
> > > included in the mail, then that would work.  Do you know if this is how
> > > this works? 
> > 
> > I don't know, unfortunately. I'll do a simple test.
> 
> The attached file isn't included in the mail. I think this is true in
> the Patch Manager as well.

Unfortunate, but a common failing of such systems (bugzilla has the same
problem)

> Hmm... I'm not sure what is the Right Thing. One possible way is to
> ask contributors to send patches to this list, and file patches in the
> BTS manually. But I don't like this, because there are many different
> ways to send patches via e-mail, such as putting them at somewhere in
> message bodies, using MIME, and just showing URLs, so the effort is
> significant.

True, but most patches for grub don't tend to be that large, so are
generally handled by either inlining them into the message or attaching
them.  Most mail clients have no problem making the patch easy to read
over in either fashion and reply with comments inlined in the patch.  At
least none of the many that I've used or experimented with have had
difficulty with this.

> Another way is to ask contributors to send patches to both the BTS and
> this list. I think most people wouldn't like this approach because of
> its burden.

I'm game to at least see how it goes to just check the BTS if the
message mentions that a patch is included.  It might not be as good as
sending patches to the list, but the only way I know of to actually find
out is to try.

Cheers,

Jeremy