[ODE] patches/unstable etc...

[John Miles]

I wonder if it would make sense to have a separate ODE mailing list just for
patches.  The S/N ratio on this one isn't great, and stuff has gotten lost
before.

Right now, it seems the only way a submitter can get a patch accepted is by
popping up every few months saying, "Why isn't my patch in the codebase?"

-- jm

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ode-bounces at q12.org [mailto:ode-bounces at q12.org]On Behalf Of Adam
> D. Moss
> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 1:18 PM
> To: ode
> Subject: Re: [ODE] patches/unstable etc...
>
>
> Jaroslav Sinecky wrote:
> > Hi all!
>
> Hi!
>
> > I know this is an old topic but I just still don't get how the
> patches are
> > working. There have been couple of patches on the maillist that
> seem to be
> > very useful (or least worth trying). As far as I understood the unstable
> > branch in CVS was created for these kind of stuff, but I don't
> see any of
> > these patches in the CVS UNSTABLE. Even for example the
> "position-correcting
> > constraints" patch by Adam Moss that appeared in April is not there.
>
> I don't think everything should just go into UNSTABLE, or it
> will live up to its name and not actually be useful for anyone.
> Posting patches to the list is a good first-filter for experimental
> changes (or, it would be if anyone actually looked at patches on
> the list!).
>
> > So if I want to try some of these patches I should apply them using the
> > textual difference format that you guys attach to mails?
>
> Yup.
>
>  > How? Manualy or is
> > there some utility for this?
>
> The 'patch' utility on all unixoids applied these patches.  I expect
> there's a patch.exe for win32 systems shipped with cygwin or similar,
> as well as various independant ports around the net.
>
> > And if let's say I have a bugfix, what should I do? Create a diff w.r.t.
> > current CVS head and send it to the list?
>
> Yes, diffs are almost the only useful way to submit fixes, since
> they isolate the fix from the rest of the drifting code (think about
> the issues of isolating the Fix from the Everything Else in a moving
> codebase otherwise).
>
> > The fact is I have a bug fix ... see this thread
> > http://q12.org/pipermail/ode/2005-June/016060.html. I cleaned
> and optimized
> > bit the code and added joint feedback printout functionality to
> > test_boxstack, so one can see clearly that what the original
> code returns is
> > completly wrong (feedbacks summed from all joints for each
> body) and the new
> > at least appears to be correct.
>
> I completely missed that.  Is looks good.  If you (or someone) can
> make a patch for it and no-one objects, I'll try to apply it to the
> trunk. :)
>
> ta,
> --adam
> --
> Adam D. Moss   -   adam at gimp.org
> _______________________________________________
> ODE mailing list
> ODE at q12.org
> http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode
>