Hey all. I've broken my change into 5 patches, which have already been
sent to the list.


The big one is patch #2, which adds the new ignore logic to deps.c.
Although the number of lines edited is large, it's just the addition of
a new data structure, some helper methods, and a rework of
_alpm_resolvedeps(). There is no way to reduce the size of this patch.


I hope that these patches are satisfactory. If you'd just give them a
try they should merge nicely into your tree. Create a branch and merge
them in and test them out. That's what git is good at right?!?


Please note that these patches replace all previous patches I've sent to
this list.


Thanks,
Bryan

_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

Bryan Ischo wrote:
Hey all. I've broken my change into 5 patches, which have already
been sent to the list.


The big one is patch #2, which adds the new ignore logic to deps.c.
Although the number of lines edited is large, it's just the addition
of a new data structure, some helper methods, and a rework of
_alpm_resolvedeps(). There is no way to reduce the size of this patch.


I hope that these patches are satisfactory. If you'd just give them a
try they should merge nicely into your tree. Create a branch and
merge them in and test them out. That's what git is good at right?!?


Please note that these patches replace all previous patches I've sent
to this list.


Thanks,
Bryan


Hi Bryan,

The main patch (#2) is too complex for me to review, but on accepting
that as is, the other patches look quite reasonable. I will give them a
proper spin when I do a testing build later.


I just wanted to point out that you should not to get too discouraged
about the number of resubmits required for your patches. Everybody who
submits patches here goes through the same thing, especially with their
first patch and yours are quite ambitious. You should see the changes
required any time I touch the pacman code...


Keep up the good work,
Allan



_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

Allan McRae wrote:

Bryan Ischo wrote:
Hey all. I've broken my change into 5 patches, which have already
been sent to the list.


The big one is patch #2, which adds the new ignore logic to deps.c.
Although the number of lines edited is large, it's just the addition
of a new data structure, some helper methods, and a rework of
_alpm_resolvedeps(). There is no way to reduce the size of this patch.


I hope that these patches are satisfactory. If you'd just give them
a try they should merge nicely into your tree. Create a branch and
merge them in and test them out. That's what git is good at right?!?


Please note that these patches replace all previous patches I've sent
to this list.


Thanks,
Bryan


Hi Bryan,

The main patch (#2) is too complex for me to review, but on accepting
that as is, the other patches look quite reasonable. I will give them
a proper spin when I do a testing build later.


Is there something I can do to make #2 clearer? Is there someone who is
going to review this and "bless" it for inclusion in the pacman
sources? Should I be addressing my emails to that person instead of
the list?




I just wanted to point out that you should not to get too discouraged
about the number of resubmits required for your patches. Everybody
who submits patches here goes through the same thing, especially with
their first patch and yours are quite ambitious. You should see the
changes required any time I touch the pacman code...


Thank you for the encouraging words. I did get a little frustrated
earlier today and I'm sure that came through in my posts. But I'm
feeling much better now as I think that the split up patches are
actually better than the single big mega-patch that I had previously
submitted. And all of this patch manipulation has taught me alot about
git, which I had previously been interested in learning (coming from a
subversion background), but never had the opportunity to use in
practice. In working on pacman I feel that I have almost become sort of
comfortable with git, at least with the basic operations, so regardless
of what happens with my pacman patches, I feel very happy with what I'm
getting out of the process.


Bryan



_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

Bryan Ischo wrote:

Allan McRae wrote:

Bryan Ischo wrote:
Hey all. I've broken my change into 5 patches, which have already
been sent to the list.


The main patch (#2) is too complex for me to review, but on accepting
that as is, the other patches look quite reasonable. I will give
them a proper spin when I do a testing build later.


Is there something I can do to make #2 clearer? Is there someone who
is going to review this and "bless" it for inclusion in the pacman
sources? Should I be addressing my emails to that person instead of
the list?




There is probably nothing that you can do to make it clearer to me. I
concentrate on makepkg so would just need to spend a couple of hours
figuring out the code and all the code around it...


The main pacman devs who will review your patches are all on this list
(Dan, Xavier, Nagy, me) so there is no need to send this directly to
anybody. These things just take time and most of us are quite busy at
the moment so just be patient.


Cheers,
Allan


_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev