Re: Large array printing patch for Fortran

Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-10-06T16:51:29Z

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