Hi Lars,
> This was not really a patch submission at all, but more of a request for
> interest.
But you did mention that it was a 'dirty patch', no? So there
is at least one person that's interested in having it included
in the trunk? Mind you, I don't know what you mean by 'dirty'.
To me, a patch is a patch.
>
> (You didn't just send me your pre-canned response to these kind of
> messages did you, without reading the message?)
>
I don't think that was a pre-canned response. But that's
just me. By even responding to your patch message, it
proves that there is interest in including it in the trunk,
so why waste time in doing it twice? You know your stuff
so it shouldn't be difficult for you to make a single-submission
patch. Me? It's evident it takes me a couple of tries;
but that's just because I'm a rookie in both Python and
C. And since mailer.py has superceded the commit-email.pl
(judging from the current trunk, this perl script is
gone), it makes even more sense to include more functionality
in mailer.py.
Btw, how would a username-password-required nntp server
fit into your patch? From what I see, it expects an
open nntp server. I'd think that'd be a great inclusion
into the mailer.py. Again, that's just my $0.02.
Edmund
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1724459
Received on 2009-04-15 11:21:03 CEST