I would help out more quickly if the patches were in the Unified diff format (diff -u ). I think some of the new ones are in Contextual diff format, and since my IDE (Eclipse) doesn't support that, I'm less motivated to go to the command line to apply the patch...
However a definitive list on what should be "applyable" now would be useful. Thanks, Paul Smith > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacob Kjome [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 6:22 AM > To: Log4J Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Bug List > > Hi Michael, > > I think this would definitely be valuable. Please do it so we can cut > down on > the number of outstanding bug reports. > > thanks, > > Jake > > Quoting Michael Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I've noticed that several of the "Minor" bugs in the bug database for > > log4j have patches included inline or as attachments. Some of them are > > over a year old and the patches don't look like they have been applied > > yet. I've weeded out a few duplicate bug reports and included a few > > patches myself. > > > > Would it be helpful if I compiled a list of bug id's this weekend that > > include trivial patches which look correct? This way the developers > > with a commit bit could go through and commit them without having to > > take the time to wade through the bug database. > > > > I'd be happy to compile such a list if this would help. > > > > Michael Price > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
