[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Fedde) writes: > On Wed, 26 Sep 2001 21:33:00 -0600 Nathan Torkington wrote: > +------------------ > | Otherwise looks good. Thanks! > +------------------ > > What's next? Do I make the changes recommended and re-post more > diffs? Do I let you do that? Then do you run the patch and commit the > file? I apparently don't have commit rights.
I think it'll work best if the original submitter keeps incorporating comments and such until there's a consensus about the change. > I have about 20 more similar changes. and expect more in the future. Awesome! :-D > Some are gratuitous fmt generated re-alignments where diff can't > tell the diff. I'll try to make sure that those are not committed. > Some are spelling and word choice changes, others are code examples > or uses of CPAN modules to do something in a cleaner, better or just > a different way. I think it's best if you keep the patches down to "one change per patch". It's easier to discuss one patch per thread, and it'll be easier for people to pick out subjects they are interested in and know something about. > My preferred method of progress would be to do small incremental > commits. Contributors could make one change per commit. That way > each could be removed or updated easily. [...] Obviously I should read ahead before writing. :] -- ask bjoern hansen, http://ask.netcetera.dk/ !try; do();
