On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 22:56:52 +0200 Patrick Lauer wrote: > > The wording in PMS is sound, and says exactly what it needs to say. > > If you'd like to propose clarifications to that wording that make it > > easier to understand, feel free to do so, but the actual meaning > > mustn't be changed. > > "A packager manager should not treat empty categories and categories > that don't exist differently. Both cases should not be treated as > errors." > > How's that? It's not circular and quite readable. And if you noticed > I borrowed most of your interpretation. I'd take a patch for that (keeping or clarifying the original sentence), although stylistically, "Neither case should be" is cleaner. Also, I think we're supposed to be using 'must' over 'should', although most of the existing language doesn't... > > In > > any case, please learn how to use 'git rebase' and only send patches > > that are against current master -- even for patches that do apply, > > if you're basing them upon unpublished changes, we can't use three > > way merges when applying them. > Ah, that sucks. Is there any non-hellish way to use git then? Do your changes on a private branch. Use either 'git cherry-pick' or 'git rebase' to copy them onto either master or a 'to-submit' branch, and create your format-patches from there. Use 'git rebase' to sort your branches out if master changes in the mean time. Note that git rebase is a swiss army chainsaw, and unless you understand exactly what it does, it's fairly easy to lose limbs... The 'Git for Computer Scientists' article [1] is a pretty good way of learning what's really going on. [1]: http://eagain.net/articles/git-for-computer-scientists/ -- Ciaran McCreesh