On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 22:56:52 +0200
Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote:
> > The wording in PMS is sound, and says exactly what it needs to say.
> > If you'd like to propose clarifications to that wording that make it
> > easier to understand, feel free to do so, but the actual meaning
> > mustn't be changed.
> 
> "A packager manager should not treat empty categories and categories
> that don't exist differently. Both cases should not be treated as
> errors."
> 
> How's that? It's not circular and quite readable. And if you noticed
> I borrowed most of your interpretation.

I'd take a patch for that (keeping or clarifying the original sentence),
although stylistically, "Neither case should be" is cleaner. Also, I
think we're supposed to be using 'must' over 'should', although most of
the existing language doesn't...

> > In
> > any case, please learn how to use 'git rebase' and only send patches
> > that are against current master -- even for patches that do apply,
> > if you're basing them upon unpublished changes, we can't use three
> > way merges when applying them.
> Ah, that sucks. Is there any non-hellish way to use git then? 

Do your changes on a private branch. Use either 'git cherry-pick'
or 'git rebase' to copy them onto either master or a 'to-submit'
branch, and create your format-patches from there. Use 'git rebase' to
sort your branches out if master changes in the mean time.

Note that git rebase is a swiss army chainsaw, and unless you
understand exactly what it does, it's fairly easy to lose limbs... The
'Git for Computer Scientists' article [1] is a pretty good way of
learning what's really going on.

[1]: http://eagain.net/articles/git-for-computer-scientists/

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh