On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 9:31 AM Michael Van Canneyt <mich...@freepascal.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 May 2020, Christo Crause via fpc-pascal wrote: > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 11:11 PM Noel Duffy via fpc-pascal < > > fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org> wrote: > > > >> Sure, I can do that. I will look at creating a patch for this. For your > >> purposes, do you prefer to have a new bug in the bug tracker opened for > >> tracking this change? > >> > > > > If your patch is related to an existing open bug report then keep > updates, > > discussions etc. under the same report, else the information gets > > fragmented. A reporter cannot delete his/her own old patches, so just > > append a version number to a new patch, if the patch completely replace a > > previous patch, and mention the changes/updates in a comment. In your > case > > something like StrToHostAddr6-v2.patch for an updated patch. > > That is correct if you want to fix a wrong patch. > > But not what you should do for this case, because there are 2 > issues: fix existing api, and extend the existing api (a refactor). > > So: separate reports, and if so desired add a link in 'related to'. > Apologies, I should probably only comment if I followed all the details of the discussion...
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal