[MPlayer-dev-eng] on breaking up patches ...

[Ivan Kalvachev]

Hmm.

Diego, have you lost your mind? Or you are drunk?

There is strictly requirement - one patch for one thing.
One patch cannot change 2 different things. And
there should not be 2+ patches for one thing.

Reuqring all people to merge all the patches they send
is absurd. It is going only to slowdown the review process,
that is the importan one.
Apply patch time is not issue.

Wish You Best
   Ivan Kalvachev
  iive


Diego Biurrun said:
> This goes to everybody sending in patches:
>
> Please send in patches as *ONE* patch, not n attachments.
>
> The math should be pretty simple: n patches take n times longer to
> apply, so they are n times less likely to be applied!  OK, the time it
> takes to apply a patch does not scale linearly with the number of
> parts it is broken up into.  But the most tedious steps do!
>
> I'll try to show you an example shell session with me trying to apply
> some random broken up patch, shell output is in [], thoughts in ():
>
> silver:/usr/src/mplayer/main$ patch --dry-run -p0 < /tmp/foo_1.diff
> [patch complains]
> (Argh, why can't people just create patches with cvs diff?!)

Good idea, never saw it written before.

>
> silver:/usr/src/mplayer/main$ patch --dry-run -p1 < /tmp/foo_1.diff
> [patch is happy]
> silver:/usr/src/mplayer/main$ patch -p1 < /tmp/foo_1.diff
> [patch is still happy]
>
> silver:/usr/src/mplayer/main$ patch --dry-run -p1 < /tmp/foo_3.diff
> [patch complains]
> (Argh, why can't people just create patches from the root of the
> source tree)

If you have looked at the patch you would have known where you should
apply it.

>
> silver:/usr/src/mplayer/main$ cd XXX
> silver:/usr/src/mplayer/main/XXX$ patch --dry-run -p1 < /tmp/foo_3.diff
> [patch is happy]
> silver:/usr/src/mplayer/main/XXX$ patch -p1 < /tmp/foo_3.diff
> [patch is still happy]
>
> Lather, rinse repeat for the next three parts of it and hope that they
> all apply cleanly, else repeat with the -R flag (and yes, I sometimes
> still forget to run all parts through --dry-run before applying some
> parts).
>
> Then there is the problem of inconsistent numbering.  Should I really
> apply foo1.diff, foo3.diff, foo4.diff, foo5.diff and not assume that
> foo2.diff is missing somewhere?
>
> And yes, I should update DOCS/tech/patches.txt and I will.

Is this a threat?