On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 06:47:13PM +0100, Rado S wrote:
> =- James Cameron wrote on Tue 26.Feb'08 at 10:23:15 +1100 -=
> > The trouble I have is that I don't know exactly what you are
> > proposing, because it hasn't hit my mental model of the current
> > situation. My mental model is integrated with the source code.
> I gave you source code.

I repeat, because it wasn't in the form of a patch, it didn't hit my
mental model.  You have to compete against all the other patches I get.

> > > Future == intention/ reasons.
> > 
> > That's an interesting viewpoint. I didn't see a contradiction.
> Fine, enlighten me then what you mean with "I'm more interested
> in {...} the future".

Sorry, I can't remember what I meant now.  I see no need to
post-justify what I said.

> > > > It would give the information I need to apply the patch.
> > > 
> > > You can't replace 1 single line of code (by copy&paste)?
> > > 
> > > > I will take a patch if I understand it and agree with it.
> > > 
> > > So, what's the problem understanding with 1 instruction replaced
> > > by another and its location?
> > 
> > Can't you use diff(1) yet? It isn't difficult. darcs even makes it
> > easier ... "darcs diff > proposed.patch"
> I can, but it takes more time to do that for such a simple patch.
> (no darcs here)

So what do you have in the way of information technology assets and
operating system software?  If I knew that I could recommend actions to
remedy your lack of darcs.

> > 9. the patch from you and any review patch from me are then pushed
> > to the external repository for others to use.
> So de-facto you lead the crowd, just reject any official
> responsibility to go all the way.

Official?  Responsibility?  I'm not elected.  Nobody gives me any
responsibility.  I merely out-do the others.  A social meritocracy.
Part of why I out-do the others is that I process patches and review
code really fast.  Makes it harder for new participants though, I see.

James Cameron    mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org     http://quozl.netrek.org/