Re: Camel / Camel-Lite Merge
- From: Philip Van Hoof <spam pvanhoof be>
- To: Matthew Barnes <mbarnes redhat com>
- Cc: tinymail-devel-list <tinymail-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: Camel / Camel-Lite Merge
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 10:54:15 +0100
This patch has been committed to trunk.
http://tinymail.org/trac/tinymail/changeset/2950
Thanks a lot for this work!
On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 23:44 -0500, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> Hi Philip,
>
> So I finally found a little time to start synchronizing Camel and
> Camel-Lite. After staring at the two trees in Meld all day today, I
> finished an initial pass at synchronizing the sources.
>
> This first pass is just scratching the surface though. I didn't make
> any functional changes and was careful to avoid any API or ABI breakage
> in either tree. The changes consist entirely of simple compiler warning
> fixes and stupid little cosmetic cleanups, which should eliminate a lot
> of the "noise" when diff'ing the two trees.
>
> The changes on the Camel side consist of:
>
> - Merge a bunch of your compiler warning fixes.
> - Merge your camel_folder_info_new() function and the several of the
> places where you prefer GSlice for memory allocation.
> - Tons of little whitespace and coding style fixes.
>
> The Camel changes were committed as revision 8211.
>
> The changes on the Camel-List side consist of:
>
> - Mark a bunch exception messages for translation.
> - A few new argument guards here and there (e.g. g_return_if_fail).
> - Tons of little whitespace and coding style fixes.
>
> Apologies for the enormity of the patch. In the course of manually
> fixing cosmetic differences I ran a command on both trees to remove all
> trailing whitespace from the source code. I think that alone accounts
> for at least half the changes in the patch.
>
> I suggest you do the following:
>
> 1. $ find -name "*.[ch]" -exec sed -ie 's/[ <tab>]*$//' {} \;
> ^^^^^ press Tab
>
> 2. Commit those changes.
>
> 3. Apply the patch.
>
> 4. Examine the remaining differences, which should be my hand edits.
>
> So it's not much really, but it's a start. And it should be much easier
> to compare the two trees for significant changes now. For the second
> pass I'll start looking at some of the beefier changes you've made.
> Expect lots of questions.
>
> Let me know if you spot any problems.
>
> Matthew Barnes
--
Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer
home: me at pvanhoof dot be
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org
http://pvanhoof.be/blog
http://codeminded.be
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]