Could someone assist with applying my simple patch in 518393?
bdrung at ubuntu.com
Tue Mar 15 21:47:27 UTC 2011
Am Dienstag, den 15.03.2011, 17:40 -0400 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> Benjamin Drung <bdrung at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 15.03.2011, 20:39 +0000 schrieb Chris
> Coulson: > The normal process is to subscribe ubuntu-sponsors.
> There's really no > need to convert it to a debdiff though,
> although some sponsors will > request this for some reason.
> I'm not sure why though, as adding a > changelog entry takes
> an additional 10 - 20 seconds on top of the time > that the
> sponsor should be spending on reviewing and testing the change
> > before they upload. > > This culture of rejecting anything
> good that doesn't have a debdiff > needs to stop, as it's
> completely frustrating for contributors. There are two types
> of contributors: prospective Ubuntu developers and drive-by
> contributors. For the former it is perfectly ok to request a
> debdiff. They need to learn the tools. For the latter it is
> too much overhead. The argument for having a debdiff: In a
> debdiff you have a real name and an email address. The patch
> author gets the credits. -- Benjamin Drung Debian & Ubuntu
> Developer -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list
> Ubuntu-motu at lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe
> at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
> That or the sponsor spends another 30 with their editor and gives the
> patch author credit.
You may have the name of the author, but not always the email address.
Sometimes you only have a nick name and nothing more.
PS: The quotation in your response is totally broken (see above). Is
this a bug or misconfiguration in your or my email client?
Debian & Ubuntu Developer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the Ubuntu-motu