[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: contributing instructions are misleading!
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: contributing instructions are misleading! |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Dec 2013 11:35:14 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:20:22PM -0500, Carl Peterson wrote:
> I was able to connect to git with minimal fuss, and currently
> use the lily-git.tcl tool to handle commits and patches.
Great! This suggests that the introduction in the CG is ok.
> All that said, where things got interesting for me was when I wanted to
> figure out how to submit my patch. Following through the directions in 2.2
> (lily-git), I got to this text:
> > Send patch files to the appropriate place:
> >
> > * If you have a mentor, send it to them via email.
> > * New contributors should send the patch attached to an email to
> address@hidden Please add a**[PATCH]a** to the subject line.
> > * Translators should send patches to address@hidden
> > * More experienced contributors should upload the patch for web-based
Right. From memory, I think there's 3 different sets of
instructions for submitting a patch in the CG. 2 of them contain
factually incorrect information, and 1 of them was correct as of
summer 2012. That one is probably still correct, but I wouldn't
feel comfortable vounching for it.
Fixing this doesn't require a reorganization. It requires
deleting the two incorrect bits, dumping a @ref{Submitting a
patch} or whatever the @node is called. On a similar note,
there's at least 2 "checklists before submitting a patch", at
least 1 of which has obsolete info.
... come to think of it, the whole "mentor" infrastructure never
got off the ground, so there *is* misleading info in chapter 1.
- Graham
- contributing instructions are misleading!, Janek Warchoł, 2013/12/07
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, James, 2013/12/07
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Phil Holmes, 2013/12/07
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Janek Warchoł, 2013/12/09
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, David Kastrup, 2013/12/10
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Janek Warchoł, 2013/12/11
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Graham Percival, 2013/12/11
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Carl Peterson, 2013/12/11
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!,
Graham Percival <=
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Carl Peterson, 2013/12/11
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Graham Percival, 2013/12/11
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Carl Peterson, 2013/12/12
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Urs Liska, 2013/12/12
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Urs Liska, 2013/12/12
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, David Kastrup, 2013/12/12
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Urs Liska, 2013/12/12
- Re: contributing instructions are misleading!, Janek Warchoł, 2013/12/31