Tim Peters <tim.one@comcast.net> writes: > [Michael Hudson] > > For patches that > > > > cvs up -j blah -j blat file > > > > can handle, I have a setup that make porting them the work of seconds. > > It takes a little while to set up, so I batch them. > > Maybe waiting for a change to show up in the trunk is a better way to go. > Since I was making the trunk change "live", and wasn't going to check > anything in before everything worked on both trunk and branch, -j was > impotent (in the way I happened to do this). Regardless, it won't work for > *this* patch if it's desired in 2.1 (too much has changed). Yes, this particular patch was exceptional in several ways (eg. no chance of applying cleanly to 21-maint, being hard to test automatically, and affecting a particularly critical bit of code). I doubt many of that list apply to the majority of bugfixes (well, quite a few probably don't apply to 21-maint by now). Longer ramblings will appear in another thread in a moment. Cheers, M. -- If you don't have friends with whom to share links and conversation, you have social problems and you should confront them instead of joining a cultlike pseudo-community. -- "Quit Slashdot.org Today!" (http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/klee/misc/slashdot.html#faq)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4