patch tracking
Mike Frysinger <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.sysutils.automake.patches |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <Ye5EuHMNJlasg86h@vapier> |
On 22 Jan 2022 18:58, Karl Berry wrote: > By the way, it occurs to me that it might be more maintainable to send > proposed patches to bug-automake, even if there is no original bug they > are fixing. More easily trackable that way, i.e., less likely to > overlook something. No biggie either way though. yeah, i was thinking having a combined tracker would be nice, but both the existing "bug" and "patches" feel wrong to converge on, and i'm not sure the toil in setting up a new one & turning down the existing two is worth the resulting bikeshed. bugs.gnu.org is currently monitoring bug-automake. what if we had it also watch automake-patches ? would that be a least terrible option ? -mike
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 833 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEuQK1JxMl+JKsJRrUQWM7n+g39YEFAmHuRLcACgkQQWM7n+g3 9YE68Q//fVDZ0rekt3oXEijA60E1YZy14OqRueKSGugZnaP2+RH/s8SGu+Bwt6hJ ZN/+t62jfbAuyV6tsk7nwey0Zuvc593MCLnoY2OlAr5DamVUw2x+IxTNxm1eQTJy Yh9dRl4+qbkV+aHkRdsezBAbzkiIo/m71DuZbzhoKmX5Qm/BLofo1RfWkBw6awb0 aVZPHSQZhlxwPLnEx6hmyvaeiXryEGjzS4Eosg2zzyvWTanG9Xj1oVTwcsKDWoaC 7IKiWzxc43TuOp+KWj6RotM8Rr84SBu36JWJeoDgmyilMxCfjPNle6EcNMEycx6b rYBCs0DSHET9PuxdapVegfMQh8EXKvWlbfbYS1XuMhLtkUbpYZ9ZsYo6INy8RiaS qwmTziwJgHm9lLHS40S2sCNMQbjFFSmaJekofVUFwCBuzvPFJMuUlTYD8fhAVcF3 5+OFZvAkDaEfV1l22fwxTcMpx6rSPYzS/rsocJEY6vCRllOL+KYXAgGgkBcFuWol rTi3E5TaGZSiO4MGD8stxy3kYGgI3N6hIWGnKlZeKdEtqxn3PpnY46xa0ltAwyeM a8xpFuwneiKdUSscSE955xwkRhZjDoiwsNf1DyPiU4h14yY+MZGbVtppZ4YVZeXa 5tM2AzsDnkG8BKYHY21+DpIR4ILgaW7Sx+ZBCs+M9Zz4cux2320= =7YH8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----