[darcs-users] darcs patch: Make the running of tests more entertaining

Eric Kow kowey at darcs.net
Sat Sep 12 19:59:26 UTC 2009


My main answer would be that it's not really a big deal.

It's all just clear and efficient communication that we're after,
right?  Do what works.  (If it turns out that I'm wrong about this
and that there is a reason that this matters, we should update our 
guides :-))

On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 11:38:49 +0200, naur at post11.tele.dk wrote:
> I amended and re-sent. And just curious now: In a case like this,
> would it be better to re-edit and create a completely new patch,
> throwing away the original?

As opposed to amending?  I don't see it would make a difference
(except for the slight bit of technical wobble in the diffs that
Ganesh pointed out, but in most cases, non-issue)

> And if this was done, should the new patch get a different name or
> could the name of the earlier patch be re-used? 

No particular need for it to get a new name even if you did that.  Just
let us know what happened and we can sleuth our way through should
anything go wrong.

-- 
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20090912/6b0e8a09/attachment.pgp>


More information about the darcs-users mailing list