Re: [Tinycc-devel] Sample patch from Mercurial repository

[KHMan]

grischka wrote:
> From: "KHMan":
> [snip snip]
>> As for changesets, my plan is to name them using the revision
>> numbers, like "cvs395.diff". I will keep a set of hg exports, like
>> "hg395.diff". This is to preserve commit order. 
> 
> Hm, I don't understand exactly. Why do we need two sets of files?

Okay, never mind then, I'll you send the Mercurial exports.

> Well, just had another idea. Instead of renaming the patches
> we could use a meta-text-file with descriptions and references 
> like:
> 
>     patch: 395.diff
>     shortname: <empty for now>
>     description: <changelog entry here>
>     link: <link into tinycc mail archive, if available>
> 
>     patch: 396.diff
>     shortname: 
>     description: ...
>     link: ...
> 
>     ....
> 
> Then we would just edit that meta-file, move entries around etc, 
> and, if useful, eventually with another script build a patch-file 
> tree from that meta-file. Do you think your coming perl script 
> could generate such meta-file along with the diffs? :-)

A lot of the info is in the extended commit message. I'll do that
and send you a bundle. If it is suitable, you can then post the
meta info to the list immediately.

> [snip snip]
>> The list only need to agree to keep pumping patches into the CVS, 
>> in order to keep tcc in "virtually one piece".
> 
> Well, I think we can and should present the edited meta-file to the 
> list and have some discussion. Also we might still find other patches 
> that Rob doesn't have yet. If we want to step towards distributed 
> development then it is useful to do things in public. 

Sure, no problem for me. I'll get right on to it.

-- 
Cheers,
Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia