Re: patches and responses...

[Paul Warren <pdw ex-parrot com>]

On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 12:21:08PM +0930, zucchi@zedzone.mmc.com.au wrote:
> Second, the specific patch in question seems to have
> little value.  

[...]

OK fair enough, but the two patches I have submitted are:

1. http://bugs.helixcode.com/db/16/1654.html
A simple one line fix for a bug that a friend mentioned to me.  I
believe that this bug is also reported in the RH beta bug tracker.

2. http://bugs.helixcode.com/db/16/1655.html
A much larger patch to add a "fast font" menu to gnome-terminal.  ie.
your favorite fonts are available on the g-t menu with a single click.

> Anyway, I think the real problem is g-t has no real maintainer.
> 
> Most of the patches i get to zvt are usually questionable
> too, or if i ask for followup information, people dont
> give it, so i can't really follow them up either.
> (and again, i haven't had a g-l build tree for quite a while).

(1) is a patch for zvt.  It's a simple bug with a simple fix.  I would
suggest that *anyone* with CVS access is qualified to assess that this
patch is OK and should be applied.  It is very discouraging that it
takes so much effort to get such a simple fix even looked at.  

(2) adds a feature that I have heard requested many times on gnome-list,
and often cited as the only reason for using xterm over g-t.  I've now
had this patch on my system for a month or two and I find it absolutely
indispensible.  I concede that a patch of this size should be looked
over by a "maintainer" before applying.

Paul