On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 16:19:40 -0800
Britton Kerin <britton.kerin_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Britton,
> To me the availability of patches in the current format implies that
> they are curated and cared for, and I don't trust automated systems
> like this to work right. I'd rather just see a patch again an old
> version.
okay, maybe there's a misunderstanding. The automation only applies
to the git-patches. For tagged versions, we just create a patch and
be done with it.
The situation definitely is a mess for dwm.
> I liked having -git_ in there. (I see later you decided to omit).
> Maybe all suckless users are git versed but I doubt it.
> Seems like an example of expecting others to see the world like
> you do. The patch names are already verbose, why not
> make things explicit?
I agree with you, but it has been decided like that and I made
the mistake to agree to the non-git version here on the ml.
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Wed Jul 13 2016 - 07:45:59 CEST