Herold Heiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>Also, could you include a ChangeLog entry with your patches? > > Sorry, yes.
Note that ChangeLog entries should (if possible) not be a part of the diff; applying them almost always fails because of the changing context. Also, please Cc your patches to wget-patches. The PATCHES file explains all this and more... >>Could you please document this in a readme file? > > The attached patch should clarify this (somewhat)... or do you think > something more verbose is needed ? No, that looks perfect. Thanks for the patch; I've now applied it to CVS. >>It's not intentional, it's just that 1.8 is far from being released, >>so I didn't update the file. But it'd be fine to update it to >>1.8-dev or something. > > Or keep it in a single file, and update at compile time version.c and > wget.texi ? I would prefer for the compilation process not to touch wget.texi. I'd really hate having a `wget.texi.in' or something. However, it might be feasible for wget.texi to include the version information from another file, possibly one auto-generated from version.c or whatever. > Possibly using sed or perl since it's already required anyway. Note that Perl is not, or should not be, required to build Wget.
