[OGo-Developer] Patches In Bugzilla

[Adam Williams]

> > Then I -
> > 1.) Edited WebUI/Project/OGoNote/Version changing  
> > "SUBMINOR_VERSION:=14"
> > to "SUBMINOR_VERSION:=15"
> > 2.) Editied ChangeLog in same directory, adding to top:
> > 2007-03-14  Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam@whitemiceconsulting.com>
>                ^^^^
> This should state the email/name of the person who contributed the  
> patch. 

Ok.

> If I make (significant) changes to the patch, I usually split  
> it into two entries, like:
> ---snip---
> 2007-03-14  Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam@whitemiceconsulting.com>
> 
>          * changed this and that to do that and this (v5.3.17)
> 
> 2007-03-14  Bla Blub <blub@bla>
> 
>          * did this and that

Ok.

> ---snap---
> 
> 
> >         * v5.1.15
> 	    ^^^
> wrong, we are at 5.3.x (OGo 1.1)

Makes sense now.

> 
> >         * hasLSWProjects initialized incorrectly
> >           (should fix OGo bug #1635)
> 
> If its just one change in a ChangeLog section, I directly append the  
> version to the change, eg:
> ---snip---
>          * hasLSWProjects initialized incorrectly
>            (should fix OGo bug #1635) (v5.3.15)
> ---snap---

Ok.

> > 3.) Committed with "svn ci" with a short message: "Fix for Bug#1635;
> > project link on notes not appearing due to improperly initialized
> > hasLSWProjects"
> Si.
> > 4.) Closed the bug;  changed to status "RESOLVED" with a comment of:
> > "Applied in r1894"
> Awesome-O.
> > Correct?
> Mostly ;-)
> > Question regarding #2:  I get the 15 in 5.1.15 is the version of the
> > directory,  but where does the 5.1 come from?  The next "Version" file
> > up the tree says 5.3 (WebUI/Version).  Maybe this doesn't mean  
> > anything,
> > just curious.
> You get it from WebUI/Version. v5.1.15 is incorrect, the version is  
> v5.3.15.

Makes sense now.

> OGo 1.0alpha	=> v5.1
> OGo 1.0		=> v5.2
> OGo 1.1		=> v5.3
> OGo 1.2		=> v5.4
> Note that we don't reset the subminor when we bump the minor, eg last  
> change was in OGo 1.0a v5.1.15, the next change is in OGo 1.1 =>  
> v5.3.16.

Ah!

> I wonder whether we should use the 'real' major numbers in OGo. That  
> is, next OGo release wouldn't be 1.2 but OGo 5.4 :-)

Yes;  I definitely +1 that idea.

> Thats not even cheated, because the codebase *is* iteration 5 (Skyrix  
> 5).

Right, OGo isn't a 1.x product; this would make that clearer.

> > Question regarding #2: The whitespace before the "*" lines is a tab,
> > this is required?  I assume this is what the changeblogger parses.
> Marcus needs to say something about this. Don't know what Xemacs  
> generates, could be a tab. Emacs has a special ChangeLog mode which  
> does all the formatting.