Re: Patch Submission Guidelines

xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net (Robert Treat) writes:

> On Tuesday 14 February 2006 16:00, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>> > I would like to suggest that we increase substantially the FAQ entries
>> > relating to patch submission. By we, I actually mean please could the
>> > committers sit down and agree some clarified written guidelines?
>>
>> As I remember, there is a disinclination to increase the size of the
>> FAQ very much. This suggests maintaining it as a seperate document. Or
>> alternatively attach it as an appendix to the main documentation.
>>
>
> Huh? The current developers FAQ is at least 1/2 the size of the main FAQ. I
> think adding a submission on patch submission guidelines is a great idea.
> I'll have a patch based on Simon's post to -patches ready in the next 24
> hours unless someone is really going to object.

If it were to be a new document, it would seem pretty sweet to call it
"The Hitchhiker's Guide To Getting Patches Accepted."

One of the "preface points" would be along the lines of...

"Here are some guidelines as to what things to do to make it as easy
as possible for proposed patches to be accepted with minimal change.
To not follow them all does not forcibly guarantee rejection; it just
increases the likelihood that the the amount of time and effort it
takes to handle it increases..."
--
select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'acm.org';
http://cbbrowne.com/info/spiritual.html
"When campaigning, be swift as the wind; in leisurely march, majestic
as the forest; in raiding and plundering, like fire; in standing, firm
as the mountains. As unfathomable as the clouds, move like a
thunderbolt." -- Sun Tzu, "The Art of War"