Jeff Trawick wrote:
It's great to see that things are happening, Jeff!
The people issues are at least:
a) making sure patches submitted on the mailing list are in the db, by
prodding the submitter to consult some on-line doc that describes the
requirements for submitting a patch
- get the
Stas Bekman wrote:
Jeff Trawick wrote:
- make sure that the PR # is in the subject of any on-list discussion
of the patch
Why not automate this process. Change bugzilla to do the job and
autogenerate the right link:
a hred=mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Post
the patch to the httpd-dev list]/a
In
Jeff Trawick wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
Jeff Trawick wrote:
- make sure that the PR # is in the subject of any on-list discussion
of the patch
Why not automate this process. Change bugzilla to do the job and
autogenerate the right link:
a
hred=mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Post
the patch to the
Jeff Trawick wrote:
I'd like to write up some notes tomorrow as a draft of a new how to
submit a patch, pointing to existing info on httpd patches and
describing the current bugzilla capability.
With the help of Glenn (gs-apache-dev at gluelogic.com, there is a first draft
at
The final sentence seems a bit long and confusing. Perhaps instead of:
An important benefit of Apache httpd is that you can modify the source as
you require, and while we understand that it is preferable to avoid
re-applying patches when a new Apache httpd is released, the ability to do
so, along
Paul J. Reder wrote:
You could have something like:
An important benefit of Apache httpd is that you can modify the source as
you require. While we do understand the desire to avoid re-applying patches
to each new Apache httpd release, that ability allows users with unique
requirements to tailor
André Malo wrote:
* Ben Collins-Sussman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW: in the Subversion project, we've assigned the hat of patch
manager to a volunteer in the community. He watches patches come in.
If any patch goes unanswered for a week or more, the patch manager files
it in the
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Jeff Trawick wrote:
What must be done to the bug tracker we have now to track the patches better?
(I'm not against having something better, but I don't want to see a delay in
waiting for some magic tool.)
We can already assign the keyword PatchAvailable for entries and
Joshua Slive wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Jeff Trawick wrote:
What must be done to the bug tracker we have now to track the patches better?
(I'm not against having something better, but I don't want to see a delay in
waiting for some magic tool.)
We can already assign the keyword PatchAvailable
* Ben Collins-Sussman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW: in the Subversion project, we've assigned the hat of patch
manager to a volunteer in the community. He watches patches come in.
If any patch goes unanswered for a week or more, the patch manager files
it in the issuetracker. No more
10 matches
Mail list logo
