Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Small nit in the manual

Expand Messages
  • Benji Fisher
    ... [snip] ... I am sorry. I interpreted the first line quoted above as asking for advice on the format as well as the content of the diff. ... I think the
    Message 1 of 10 , Jan 2, 2004
      > On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 09:06:25PM -0500, François Pinard wrote:
      > > Hi, people. Would you check if the following diff is appropriate? I
      [snip]

      On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 10:20:33PM -0500, François Pinard wrote:
      > [Benji Fisher]
      >
      > > I agree with the content of your change. As for format, I prefer to
      > > use the same one as the official patches: context-style diffs (diff
      > > -c) generated from the top-level distribution directory. Something
      > > like this for a single file:
      >
      > This is annoying... Some maintainers like context diffs and hate
      > unidiffs, other maintainers just want the contrary. I find it difficult
      > to remember, for every tool I use, what are the little whims of each
      > maintainer. They all try to educate me into their particular habits.

      I am sorry. I interpreted the first line quoted above as asking
      for advice on the format as well as the content of the diff.

      > Plain diffs, I would understand. But context diffs or unidiffs are
      > fully equivalent, and moreover, there are tools converting between
      > both, which maintainers should silently use for themselves. (I think I
      > even have one somewhere in my distributions, contributed long ago by an
      > employee from Borland. There are others floating around, as well.)

      I think the main reason for preferring context diffs is that some
      versions of patch cannot deal with the unified format. Perhaps I should
      have stressed that this is a preference, not a requirement: most
      readers of this list can deal with either type, but context diffs are
      more convenient for a minority.

      > Times have changed. Not so long ago, I would have written a very simple
      > message directly to the maintainer that a "not" word was missing,
      > quoting the document and the sentence, and this would have fully
      > sufficient, and plain welcome. In this case, I ought to make the effort
      > of prematurely subscribing to the `vim-dev' mailing list (working my
      > way around a slightly broken robot, but this is another matter), and
      > producing a diff for this tiny nit, well aware that a diff is likely
      > overkill: a simple and quick Vim session is probably much more efficient
      > than `patch' in this case. You scrutinise diffs anyway, don't you! :-)
      > I spent nearly an hour for a single word, and you're still not happy?

      A bug in the documentation can be reported to bugs@... (which
      goes to Bram Moolenaar) just like any other bug. This address does not
      require any subscription. I just appended a note to this effect to my
      tip at http://www.vim.org/tips/tip.php?tip_id=618 .

      I agree that, in this case, a patch is overkill. In my experience,
      Bram is more than happy to accept informal notes about such corrections.

      :help bugs
      :help design-documented

      > On the other hand, it could have been much worse, and you might have
      > thrown bug trackers at me :-). Who knows, I may adapt to these blatant
      > failures of UI-design, but for now, I just refuse to contribute when
      > maintainers want me to spend hours studying concepts and fighting bugs
      > of their new Web toys, each maintainer his own, for acquiring the right
      > of submitting a report. I wish Vim never goes there! For the packages
      > I maintained or maintain, I warmly receive reports and suggestions as
      > worth contributions, and value the time of the submitters too, not only
      > mine. I'm reasonable, and they are. One of these days, I'll write a
      > Web page for moaning all my soul about the current trends :-).

      I think we all try to be reasonable. I am sorry for the waste of
      time, especially since I am probably partly responsible. At least, I
      expect it to be a one-time cost.

      --Benji Fisher
    • Keith Roberts
      ... Please don t consider this thread to be a waste of bandwidth ... I, for one, learned a lot. But for those of us who aren t up to speed on all the various
      Message 2 of 10 , Jan 5, 2004
        >-----Original Message-----
        >From: Benji Fisher [mailto:benji@...]
        >Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 5:37 AM
        >To: Forum of Vim developers
        >Subject: Re: Small nit in the manual
        >
        >> > I agree with the content of your change. As for format, I prefer to
        >> > use the same one as the official patches: context-style diffs (diff
        >> > -c) generated from the top-level distribution directory. Something
        >> > like this for a single file:
        >
        >I think the main reason for preferring context diffs is that some
        >versions of patch cannot deal with the unified format. Perhaps I should
        >have stressed that this is a preference, not a requirement: most
        >readers of this list can deal with either type, but context diffs are
        >more convenient for a minority.
        >
        >A bug in the documentation can be reported to bugs@... (which
        >goes to Bram Moolenaar) just like any other bug. This address does not
        >require any subscription. I just appended a note to this effect to my
        >tip at http://www.vim.org/tips/tip.php?tip_id=618 .
        >
        > I agree that, in this case, a patch is overkill. In my experience,
        >Bram is more than happy to accept informal notes about such corrections.
        >
        >:help bugs
        >:help design-documented
        >
        >I think we all try to be reasonable. I am sorry for the waste of
        >time, especially since I am probably partly responsible. At least, I
        >expect it to be a one-time cost.

        Please don't consider this thread to be a waste of bandwidth ... I, for one,
        learned a lot. But for those of us who aren't up to speed on all the
        various diff formats, here are some useful links:
        http://borg.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/cgi-bin/info2www?(diff)Index
        http://borg.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/cgi-bin/info2www?(diff)Context

        I also finally found [the Google links are too old]:
        http://www.gnu.org/software/diffutils/manual/html_mono/diff.html#toc_Top

        [search for Context and/or Unified and follow link]
      • François Pinard
        [François Pinard] ... [Benji Fisher] ... [François Pinard] ... [Benji Fisher] ... We are both sorry. I should have seen the ambiguity of my saying while
        Message 3 of 10 , Jan 8, 2004
          [François Pinard]
          > Hi, people. Would you check if the following diff is appropriate?
          > [...]

          [Benji Fisher]
          > I agree with the content of your change. As for format, I prefer
          > [...] context-style diffs [...]

          [François Pinard]
          > This is annoying... Some maintainers like context diffs and hate
          > unidiffs, other maintainers just want the contrary. [...]

          [Benji Fisher]
          > I am sorry. I interpreted the first line quoted above as asking for
          > advice on the format as well as the content of the diff.

          We are both sorry. I should have seen the ambiguity of my saying while
          writing it.

          > I think we all try to be reasonable. I am sorry for the waste of
          > time, especially since I am probably partly responsible. At least, I
          > expect it to be a one-time cost.

          The cost for me is staying on vim-dev, while it is a bit prematurate in
          my case. But the volume is not high, and the exchanges are interesting,
          so I guess I'll just stick around, yet silently for a while. :-)

          Keep happy, everybody.

          --
          François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
        • Nazri Ramliy
          On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:58:40PM -0500, François Pinard wrote: [Benji Fisher] ... [François Pinard] ... I just love happy ending, :) Nazri.
          Message 4 of 10 , Jan 8, 2004
            On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:58:40PM -0500, François Pinard wrote:
            [Benji Fisher]
            > > I am sorry. I interpreted the first line quoted above as asking for
            > > advice on the format as well as the content of the diff.
            >
            [François Pinard]
            > We are both sorry. I should have seen the ambiguity of my saying while
            > writing it.
            >
            > > I think we all try to be reasonable. I am sorry for the waste of
            > > time, especially since I am probably partly responsible. At least, I
            > > expect it to be a one-time cost.
            >
            > The cost for me is staying on vim-dev, while it is a bit prematurate in
            > my case. But the volume is not high, and the exchanges are interesting,
            > so I guess I'll just stick around, yet silently for a while. :-)
            >
            > Keep happy, everybody.

            I just love happy ending, :)

            Nazri.
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.