Markus Heidelberg wrote:
> Tony Mechelynck, 24.08.2008: > > > > OTOH, I would have nothing against both above-mentioned patches being > > incorporated into the mainline sources, Bill's patch as part of the > > +float feature, and your relative-numbers patch either as standard or as > > another optional feature (I suppose the latter would imply bracketing > > all its changes in #ifdef directives but it might be the better choice). > > But of course Bram has the final say on this matter. > > If encapsulating the feature in #ifdef directives would be required > for mainline, I would do it. But I don't think it's the better choice. > It is a small feature and by using #ifdef the source code would be > split up even though much of the environment already exists because of > the 'number' option. I think it's a good idea to have a central place to find Vim patches. www.vim.org would be the right place for them. I don't want to add the actual source code there (unless it's a relatively small patch file). It's better for each modification to have their own site, with CVS/Subversion, docs, etc. The central place would be listing the available patches, description and a link to the site where it can be downloaded. Perhaps it's sufficient to add them to the scripts, with a special type. And instead of a download you would have a link to the external site. -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 10. And even your night dreams are in HTML. /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\ download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org /// \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
