On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Aaron Plattner <aplatt...@nvidia.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 03:29:34PM -0700, Peter Hutterer wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 03:20:03PM -0700, Aaron Plattner wrote: >> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 03:09:02PM -0700, Peter Hutterer wrote: >> > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:46:58AM -0700, Aaron Plattner wrote: >> > > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 03:09:06PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote: >> > > > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Aaron Plattner >> > > > > <aplatt...@nvidia.com> wrote: >> > > > > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 06:07:14AM -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote: >> > > > > >> A while back Peter asked me about helping him add autotools >> > > > > >> support >> > > > > >> after he pulled xtest out of cvs into git. We got that handled >> > > > > >> pretty >> > > > > >> quickly, but I decided to spend some time making it actually easy >> > > > > >> to >> > > > > >> use. So, I give you the revamped XTS: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> git://people.freedesktop.org/~dbn/xtest.git >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Dan, is xtest really licensed under the "Artistic" license? I >> > > > > > have some >> > > > > > changes pending to clean up a whole lot of warnings, but I just >> > > > > > noticed >> > > > > > this term in the license: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > 3. You may otherwise modify your copy of this Package in any way, >> > > > > > provided that you insert a prominent notice in each changed >> > > > > > file >> > > > > > stating how and when you changed that file, [...] >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I'd like to avoid having to go through and add a change note to >> > > > > > all 551 >> > > > > > files I've touched so far. >> > > > > >> > > > > I think the Artistic license applies to the bundled tet code (the >> > > > > test >> > > > > platform) in src/. This is what License says. However, everything >> > > > > under xts5 (the test suite itself) appears to be under the X11 >> > > > > license. So, if you've kept your modifications to xts5/, you're OK. >> > > > > Of >> > > > > course, now it appears I'll have to do that to address the hacking I >> > > > > did to the test platform to make it behave reasonably. What a weak >> > > > > license. >> > > > >> > > > Okay. I did touch a bunch of files in tet, but it was easy to use a >> > > > script >> > > > to do it (vim is awesome). There are still a ton of warnings to go in >> > > > xts5, but I think this is a good start. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > The following changes since commit >> > > > 1f9c7db3a60e22b06bd5b5b457ed048f89031b24: >> > > > Jon TURNEY (1): >> > > > xts5: Make sure libXR5 preceeds the libraries it depends upon >> > > > in the link order >> > > > >> > > > are available in the git repository at: >> > > > >> > > > git://people.freedesktop.org/~aplattner/xtest master >> > > > >> > > > Aaron Plattner (8): >> > > > tet: Fix "sccsid defined but not used" warnings. >> > > > tet: Fix "srcFile defined but not used" warnings. >> > > > tet: Fix "ambiguous else" warnings. >> > > > tet: Fix the remaining warnings. >> > > > tet: Add change notifications to comply with the annoying terms >> > > > of the 'Artistic' license. >> > > > xts5: Fix "missing braces around initializer" warnings. >> > > > xts5: Fix "unused variable" warnings. >> > > >> > > in this patch, in xts5/src/lib/startup.c: >> > > -extern char *TestName; >> > > +/* APTETS extern char *TestName; */ >> > > >> > > that seems like an odd change. >> > >> > It's supposed to match this code later, except that I typo'd it: >> > >> > /*APTEST >> > (void) sprintf(buf, "TRACE:NAME: %s", TestName); >> > tet_infoline(buf); >> > */ >> > >> > Do you think it's worth fixing? I could just delete the commented-out >> > code, since it exists in revision control. >> >> is /*APTEST supposed to do something special? >> >> if not, just do a follow-up patch and delete it, or squash it in. I don't >> have a preference either way. > > I don't think so... "git grep APTEST" only shows it in a few comments. > Presumably it was just a grep target. I'll send Dan a followup change to > delete it. > >> > > > xts5: Fix "format 'blah' expects type 'blah' but argument has >> > > > type 'blah'" warnings. >> > > > >> > > > 555 files changed, 1833 insertions(+), 3841 deletions(-) >> > > >> > > Acked-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutte...@who-t.net> >> > >> > I'm not too familiar with the procedure for this... should I add your >> > Acked-by to all the changes, or is rewinding the published HEAD to rewrite >> > the commit logs bad form? >> >> two options. what I did with a few pull requests that got a late acked-by, I >> just added this to the merge commit so it's saved somewhere. that of course >> requires a non-fast-forward pull. > > Or a git pull --no-ff. > >> the other option is to edit the tree. I do the editing with my branches >> sometimes, if I'm only adding acked-by and reviewed-by, then I'm not >> destroying testing history. and if it's a pull-branch only, it won't matter >> much if the shas change anyway. >> >> Or, the third (out of two options) is to simply take the acked-by as a, >> "yeah, that'll be alright to merge" and ignore it. :) >> which was mostly how it was meant anyway. I dont thing the XTS requires the >> same process as the server just yet. > > Okay, thanks. I'll choose your option #3 of 2, then. :)
I'm pulling in these in today, but I also figured this one out after playing with git-filter-branch. git filter-branch --msg-filter "sed '\$a Acked-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutte...@who-t.net>'" master.. -- Dan _______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel