Re: augmented diff design patch format

Eric Gillespie wrote:
> What is incredibly valuable (and common!) is reading a patch in
> email and doing code review by replying to the email. Do we
> really want to force people to send two attachments with the same
> data in different formats? I stand by my assertion that the
> second (tree-sensitive) format will simply not be there most of
> the time.

I suspect that to the degree that patch review via email is common, patches
which include binary file, tree changes, and property mods are *un*common.
So I see no reason to require folks to send both styles of patch unless both
styles are needed. The change to our patch submission guidelines is a one
sentence mod:

   If your patch, when applied to clean working copy, does not produce
   results which, if committedly immediately thereafter, result in the
   exact change you intended (including added and removed files and
   property modifications), then please also include a --deltas version
   of your patch file.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand