- From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 02:03:45 +0100
- To: "Mario J. Lia" <antilyrical@spamcop.net>
- cc: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
Mario J. Lia <antilyrical@spamcop.net> wrote: >I made a few small changes to the validor check file and would like to >submit my changes for "peer review" ;-) What is the best way for me to >do it? I can either generate a patch file from diff, I would just need >to know what diff options should be used. Or I could make the change via >CVS, although that seems like a bigger step, and I think more people >need to see the code. Unidiff format is preferred. Generate your patches -- preferably by using "cvs diff -u" in $CVSROOT/validator/ or in $CVSROOT/validator/cgi-bin/ if you only touch the "check" or "checklink" CGIs -- and send them to the list. Please try to keep changes isolated, one patch per logical change, instead of a single patch that lumps together multiple unrelated changes (unless it's very small changes and/or stuff like whitespace/spelling fixes). Do try to respect the existing coding-style, but don't fret over it. I apply patches manually in any case so I can clean up any inconsistency. Do be very clear about the level of testing and general quality of the code! It's ok to submit half-baked, pre-alpha, code as long as it's clearly labelled as such. Of course, we prefer fully-formed, well tested and polished code, but we ain't too picky! :-) Do also describe the changes you've made; obvious changes are not necessarily equally obvious to others. No need for a dissertation, but err to the side of verbosity when explaining What, Why, and How. Worst case just send your entire changed file, or even a tarball, and I/we will do the diff locally (but do try to generate the diffs instead if you can). -- If you believe that will stop spammers, you're sadly misled. Rusty hooks, rectally administered fuel oil enemas, and the gutting of their machines, *that* stops spammers! -- Saundo
Received on Thursday, 14 November 2002 20:03:51 UTC