Evan Jones wrote: > Sure. This should be done even for patches which should absolutely not > be committed? Difficult question. I think the answer goes like this: "Patches that should absolutely not be committed should not be published at all". There are different shades of gray, of course - but people typically dislike receiving patches through a mailing list. OTOH, I'm guilty of committing a patch myself which was explicitly marked as not-to-be-committed on SF, so I cannot really advise to use SF in this case. Putting it on your own web server would be best. Regards, Martin
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