From owner-freebsd-bugs Fri Feb 28 22:25:31 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA13721 for bugs-outgoing; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 22:25:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA13715 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 22:25:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id WAA01859; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 22:25:06 -0800 (PST) To: Charles Henrich cc: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans), mpp@freefall.freebsd.org, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: mail.local modifications? In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 01 Mar 1997 00:13:40 EST." <199703010513.AAA08565@crh.cl.msu.edu> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 22:25:05 -0800 Message-ID: <1855.857197505@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Are you telling me because I used spaces instead of tabs that its rejected? > Thats friggin ridiculous! I thought we were bitching about CONTENT not trivi a! I think you may have missed the point. I can't speak for everyone else, but if someone sends me a patch which doesn't apply, and I've got 5001 other things to do (that being a constant), I simply won't bother with it. This isn't snobbery, this is a simple matter of saying "huh, oh well! I don't have time to grub through diff output, and a patch reject implies problems on the submitter's end in 99.9% of the cases (invalidating the patch) so I guess I'll come back to this later and go on to the next item in my list (a new stack frame is pushed, never to return :)." The moral of the story? Provide proper diffs, don't just go cut-n-paste happy. Overwork is the order of the day here, and if you make it harder on the committer then he's likely to simply move on to the next task and drop yours on the floor. Given the backlog of tasks we have, I also wouldn't have it any other way. Jordan