Re: Large array printing patch for Fortran

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 09:45:45AM -0700, David Carlton wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:35:17 +0100, David Lecomber <david@streamline-computing.com> said:
> 
> > This patch sets the formatting correctly in the patch I previously
> > applied.  
> 
> > 2003-09-29  David Lecomber  <dsl@sources.redhat.com>
> 
> > 	* f-valprint.c: Reformatting
> 
> I'm sorry you find it frustrating that people don't approve your
> patches as quickly as they should.  But you still have to wait for
> approval before committing them.  I've told you this before, Daniel
> has told you this before.  If you don't like waiting, nag people;
> don't just go ahead and commit stuff.
> 
> There are two things wrong with your ChangeLog entry; I'm in a bad
> enough mood that I'm not going to tell you what they are.  Look
> through other ChangeLog entries, see how yours is different from
> theirs.  (And, while you're at it, look at what's wrong with your
> ChangeLog entry from 2003-09-15, too.)  Then, post the diffs here and
> WAIT FOR SOMEBODY TO GIVE YOU EXPLICIT APPROVAL TO COMMIT THEM.

(A) I approved this patch in private.
(B) It's an obvious, withspace only patch so I didn't feel the need to
copy the list when I approved it.
(C) As a write-after-approval maintainer he is allowed to commit truly
obvious patches.  Which this will be once he gets changelog style down.

I'm sorry I didn't post the approval in triplicate to the list.

David L, the problems David C refers to:
 - Generally include the names of modified functions, unless you're
globally touching the whole file.
 - ChangeLog entries end with a full stop.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer