Re: extended zvt widget

On Tue, 2002-04-30 at 00:45, jacob berkman wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-04-29 at 18:27, Cristiano De Michele wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-04-30 at 00:15, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > > 
> > > Cristiano De Michele <[email protected]> writes:
> > > > 
> > > > Havoc what should I do with my zvt patches? maybe should we
> > > > commit them? so that using profterm people can also them
> > > > or you think this way is dangerous (though I don't think
> > > > so ;-) or you're not interested in...
> > > 
> > > It would be nice as Jacob says to get a separate patch for each issue
> > > being fixed, ideally...
> > > 
> > sadly I think I'll have no time to separate all bugs
> > as J. suggested, and I think it's quite boring too and
> > maybe not feasible because I, as I said, I rewrote a lot of
> > things...
> 
> note that these are precisely the reasons i don't want to have to go
> through the patch as a whole.
> 
> the difference is that you can (theoretically) explain the changes you
> made.
> 
> jacob
but jacob if you run vttest inside a patched zvt and
a not patched one you can see clearly all changes 
I think that's the best way...


> -- 
> "don't get me wrong, i think that radiohead are amazing. i love their
>  music and i love their ethos, but that thom yorke guy always seems to
>  be complaining." -- moby
-- 
  Cristiano De Michele,
  Department of Physics,
  University "Federico II" of Naples