[PD-dev] PD_LONGINTTYPE

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

On 2018-06-24 21:08, Miller Puckette wrote:
> Cool.... that just saved me hours of work going through PRs one by one :)

great to be of help.

please note, that there are a number of PRs that are *not* included,
(e.g. the PD_LONGINTTYPE patch [7]).

my rule of thumb for including patches in the PR is that they must be
no-brainers:
#1 only bugfixes
#2 the patch is trivial
#3 the patch is "unanimous" (no protests, "buts" or second thoughts have
been (ever) voiced)

i haven't included the PD_LONGINTTYPE patch because of #3 (see †).
i haven't included some of the help-patch updates because of #2 (as
Pd-patches are really a pain to compare).

i try my best to live up to my own rules, but as a human this is not
always easy.

gfmasdr
IOhannes

[7] https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/7
† https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/7#issuecomment-216948587

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20180625/fe7a9d5c/attachment.sig>