Hi Ricardo,

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:

> Hi Alex,
>
>> Thanks for the review again, the package definition is now simplier.
>
> You only attached the patch to the Clojure sources.  Could you please
> also attach the latest patch to add the clojure package?
>
Ahhh, I think I formatted the wrong patch (I am a new user of
magit). This time the correct one is attached.

>> Yes, the ASM library is included as source (not jar) and is one majar
>> version behind upstream (4 vs 5). Also, this SO question says it is indeed a
>> fork
>> (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21642115/how-does-the-clojure-compiler-generates-jvm-bytecode).
>
> In this case I think it’s okay to not carve it out of the Clojure source
> archive.  Once we need an ASM package in the future we can revisit this
> decision and see if we can express one in terms of the other.
>
Agreed, I see debian make the split, but it is because they have
multiple packages build-depend on it.

[...]

>> Finally, I want to ask do I need to sign my commit? I sign my commit and
>> do a `magit-format-patch', but it seems the patch does not contain info
>> of the signature.
>
> The signature would not make it into the repository if you sent the
> commit as a patch.  The committer to the central repository at Savannah
> is the one who signs the commit — this does not mean that the committer
> claims authorship, of course.
>
Got it!

> Thanks again for your work.  Please send the missing patch some time :)
>
> ~~ Ricardo

Cheers,
Alex