Re: Incorporating patches into GNU Emacs

[Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com>]

Aha! Now we're getting somewhere.

"Stefan Monnier" <monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu> writes:

>> Here's a specific example from bug.gnu.emacs: A patch from an Emacs user
>> who hasn't signed papers. Are you telling me that a) you'll ignore it,
>> or b) you'll really go through all the trouble of getting Gustav to sign
>> papers in order to use it?
>
> For such trivial changes, we don't need papers.

That's what I thought. At which point do the changes become nontrivial?

> Also, in many cases, it's easier to rewrite the thing than to get
> the paperwork done.

OK, so *that's* what folks do in practice. Simply take the ideas and
incorporate them.

Still curious about what constitutes a non-trivial patch though.

--
Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com>  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and MH-E. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.