2011/1/28 Basile Starynkevitch <bas...@starynkevitch.net>:
>> Its intention is to mention noteworthy internal changes, i.e. changes
>> interesting for, say, maintainers of backends/frontends outside the
>> tree, and of course plugin developers upgrading from 4.5 to 4.6.
>>
>
>
> I am not sure to understand what is the social rules to modify that. I
> suppose that any patch to that page should be approved with the same
> strong process as patches to trunk code?

It needs to be reviewed, but it's much easier IMHO.

> I am not sure to understand the technical ways to modify that; is CVS
> still mandatory?

Yes.

> Perhaps we should mention the gtype.state file also.

I think that mentioning gtype.state--very shortly--is a good idea.
Would you like to prepare the patch with your suggested wording?

-- 
Laurynas

Reply via email to