Dear Rony, It is not just about the mechanics of applying a patch. What I think Jon is hinting at are guidelines for who and under what conditions parched are accepted. IMO it should really be up to the core developers if a patch should be allowed or not. If it is just about linguistic problems Jon may be in a position to help out (whereas I would prefer not to since I am not a native speaker).
So some guidelines would be welcome indeed. Hälsningar/Regards/Grüsse, P.O. Jonsson [email protected] > Am 25.10.2025 um 15:53 schrieb Rony G. Flatscher <[email protected]>: > > On 25.10.2025 15:24, Sahananda wrote: >> I have been thinking about this. If I apply a patch I am actually reviewing >> the providers work. >> >> We should really have some guidelines about this. >> >> Just because I was given committer status a decade ago, doesn't mean that I >> have an overview of all the changes that are going on nor that I can >> necessarily be the arbiter of whether a patch should be committed or not nor >> whether it would need falling back. >> >> I feel it would be helpful to me to have clearly stated procedures for >> accepting/rejecting/committing patches. > How about this for creating patches: > > a patch should be created in the "trunk" directory > How about this for applying patches: > > a patch must be applicable from the "trunk" directory > > before applying a patch the command "svn update" should issued to get the > latest version from Sourceforge > > then the patch should be applied locally with "svn patch > name-of-diff/patchfile" from the "trunk" directory > > if there are problems, because there are overlapping changes with commits > that occurred after the creation of the diff/patch file, then this should be > communicated in the respective tracker entry; > > the creator of the diff/patch can then do an "svn update" and see where his > changes overlap with the newer text and can resolve them and then create an > updated diff/patch file with "svn diff" and submit it > > it may be the case that the problems are not complicated and can be resolved > on the side of the applyer of the diff/patch file by inspecting the mark-up > that "svn" applies > Here are two links that explain much better how svn conflicts can be resolved: > > Tortoise (Windows): > <https://www.tortoisesvn.net/docs/release/TortoiseSVN_en/tsvn-dug-conflicts.html> > > <https://www.tortoisesvn.net/docs/release/TortoiseSVN_en/tsvn-dug-conflicts.html> > Command line (shown for Unix, but the command line is the same on Windows): > <https://www.tutorialspoint.com/svn/svn_resolve_conflicts.htm> > <https://www.tutorialspoint.com/svn/svn_resolve_conflicts.htm> > There may be better explanations, tutorials on the net. > > Hope that helps > > ---rony > > > >> On Sat, 25 Oct 2025 at 13:38, Rony G. Flatscher <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> One important hint about applying patches. It may be the case that in the >>> meantime someone else committed changes. In order to make sure that >>> everything is alright, one should always do a "svn update" before a "svn >>> commit". This way one can see before the commit, whether there are areas >>> which got concurrently changed, in which case this needs to be resolved. >>> However, usually changes occur in different parts of the code, the >>> documentation and the tests which svn should be able to handle (it is able >>> to realize which version was used for the patch and infer any changes in >>> between and can usually apply patches in full if they do not overlap). >>> >>> ---rony >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 24.10.2025 17:40, Sahananda wrote: >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> I think I am now in a position to apply patches. >>>> >>>> I reinstalled Tortoise, and now I see a child dialog of the diff dialog >>>> that I didn't notice before allowing me to choose which patch to action >>>> (it was a Hobsons Choice). The dialog was off my screen apart from a tiny >>>> sliver, but once I managed to grab it and drag it onto the screen I could >>>> choose the patch and then the diff was populated. >>>> >>>> As P.O. had already applied the changes (thank you) and I had updated to >>>> the post change level while rebuilding my working copy to mirror Josep >>>> Maria's there was now no change left to apply, but I am confident that it >>>> would work in future. >>>> >>>> As Rony says, the patch to be actioned should be placed in the folder >>>> above what is indicated in the Index: clause within the patch file. In >>>> this case, the 'docs' folder. >>>> >>>> Jon >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, 24 Oct 2025 at 16:14, Rony G. Flatscher <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> First of all, thank you all *very* much for taking on the patches and >>>>> also all of your work in the documentation/patch area! >>>>> >>>>> Sorry to read that you had so many problems with it, maybe a few words, >>>>> hints: >>>>> >>>>> The path given at the beginning of the diff/patch files tells one in >>>>> which directory the creator of the diff/patch was located; so if it >>>>> starts with "trunk/rexxref/en-US/....xml", it must have been the "docs" >>>>> directory, so Josep Maria had that from the Sourceforge project checked >>>>> out, but P.O. and Jon did probably check out the doc's "trunk" directory >>>>> (and all its subdirectories), but not the directory "docs" in which >>>>> "trunk" and the "releases" are located. Therefore applying the patch did >>>>> not work. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe to ease handling, please create the diff/patches from within the >>>>> "trunk" directory (underneath a possibly existing "docs" directory), then >>>>> the diff/patch should start with "rexxref/en-US/....xml" instead and one >>>>> can apply them from "trunk" then. >>>>> >>>>> Ad forward slashes: these should work on the Windows version of svn as >>>>> well. >>>>> Please keep up your great work! >>>>> >>>>> ---rony >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 24.10.2025 12:41, Josep Maria Blasco wrote: >>>>>> The revision number shouldn't matter, as far as I know. >>>>>> It was the current one when I uploaded the patches. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regarding the paths, the instruction set I'm following reads >>>>>> >>>>>> Once you are ready with the intended changes, >>>>>> go up to the root of the documentation and issue "svn diff > >>>>>> myPatchForChapter3.1.2.diff" >>>>>> which will write all the changes to that text file. Submit that >>>>>> diff-file (patch-file) as a patch[...] >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe the boldfaced part explains the difference? >>>>>> >>>>>> Josep Maria >>>>>> >>>>>> Missatge de Sahananda <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>>> del dia dv., 24 d’oct. 2025 a les 10:47: >>>>>>> I would also be interested in an answer to this. I tried creating a >>>>>>> patch locally and noted these differences from Josep Maria's patch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The file references did not have paths. >>>>>>> My Working copy was at revision 13031 whilst Josep Maria's was at 13026 >>>>>>> I also note that Josep Maria's patch which contained directory >>>>>>> information used '/' as the path separator. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jon >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My Header >>>>>>>> Index: intro.xml >>>>>>>> =================================================================== >>>>>>>> --- intro.xml (revision 13031) >>>>>>>> +++ intro.xml (working copy) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Josep Maria's Header >>>>>>>> Index: trunk/rexxref/en-US/intro.xml >>>>>>>> =================================================================== >>>>>>>> --- trunk/rexxref/en-US/intro.xml (revision 13026) >>>>>>>> +++ trunk/rexxref/en-US/intro.xml (working copy) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Oct 2025 at 08:15, ooRexx <[email protected] >>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I wanted to apply the patches proposed by Josep Maria but failed >>>>>>>> miserably to do so. I have now applied the changes indicated in >>>>>>>> doc_bug_326.diff manually and that worked so there is nothing wrong >>>>>>>> with my SVN. I nevertheless would like to know why the patch did not >>>>>>>> work. Here is what I did: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> % cd /Users/jenkins/ooRexxSVN-Code-0/docs/trunk/rexxref/en-US >>>>>>>> % svn update >>>>>>>> Aktualisiere ».«: >>>>>>>> Revision 13031. >>>>>>>> % svn patch /Users/jenkins/Downloads/doc_bug_326.diff >>>>>>>> C trunk/rexxref/en-US/instrc.xml >>>>>>>> > Abschnitt @@ -2081,9 +2081,8 @@ zurückgewiesen >>>>>>>> Konfliktübersicht: >>>>>>>> Textkonflikte: 1 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What am I doing wrong? >>>>>>>> Is the patch not in the correct form? >>>>>>>> Or do I have to perform the patches in a specific order? >>>>>>>> I am on r13031 and the patch was made at r13026, does that make a >>>>>>>> difference? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here the rejection grounds >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- trunk/rexxref/en-US/instrc.xml >>>>>>>> +++ trunk/rexxref/en-US/instrc.xml >>>>>>>> @@ -2081,9 +2081,8 @@ >>>>>>>> in this case must be either >>>>>>>> <computeroutput>SCIENTIFIC</computeroutput> or >>>>>>>> <computeroutput>ENGINEERING</computeroutput>. You can omit the >>>>>>>> subkeyword >>>>>>>> VALUE if <emphasis role="italic">expression2</emphasis> does not >>>>>>>> begin with a >>>>>>>> -symbol or a literal string, >>>>>>>> -that is, if it starts with a special character, such as an operator >>>>>>>> character >>>>>>>> -or parenthesis.</para> >>>>>>>> +symbol, that is, if it starts with a string or a special character, >>>>>>>> +such as an operator character or parenthesis.</para> >>>>>>>> <para>You can retrieve the current NUMERIC FORM setting with the >>>>>>>> <xref linkend="bifForm" xrefstyle="select:title"/> built-in function. >>>>>>>> </para> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hälsningar/Regards/Grüsse, >>>>>>>> ooRexx >>>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
_______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
