Re: [PATCH] doc: Update contribution guidelines on patches, etc.

[Maxime Devos]

On 09-08-2022 21:08, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:

> > > > On 06-08-2022 08:55, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > +If your package has a bug that takes multiple lines to fix,
> > > > >             
> > > > I don't think this is true for replacing all instances of "foo"
> > > > by 
> > > > "/gnu/store/.../bin/foo" in a file.
> > > >           
> > > Should it?
> > >         
> > I don't think so. Directly substituting all the instances instead of
> > first writing a patch that does "foo" -> "@foo@" or such seems
> > simpler to me.  This might be a bit too nit-picky though, maybe it's
> > clear from context that this is not the kind of fix meant by that
> > line.
> >       
> I'm struggling to see the issue here.  For starters, it doesn't take
> multiple lines to embed a store path, the change usually happens on a
> single line.  Of course, translating this into a substitute*, you
> expand this single line into multiple ones, but that's not what is
> meant here.
>

I was thinking of files that contain multiple instances of "foo" (usually on multiple lines) to be replaced by "/gnu/store/.../bin/foo", not files were a "foo
bar" was broken over multiple lines and it needs to be replaced by "/gnu/store/.../bin/foo
bar".

At least for the former, I don't think an intermediate "@foo@" is useful (with some exceptions, when a pattern match would catch too much).

The latter could in principle happen, but it doesn't seem to happen in practice.

Greetings,
Maxime.

OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature