You don't _need_ a patch to get a newer version of anything. You can just
delete the old version of gimp & download 1.1.18 (which is getting much
nicer, I must say). But that aside, it seems like a good idea to archive
patches.
==================================================================
Jonathan Erbe aka Erunantion
The Annals of Middle-earth
<"http://rush.baked.net/~jerbel/";>
E-mail me at <"mailto:jerbel@xxxxxxxxxxx";>
==================================================================
On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Ben Fowler wrote:
> I can't believe that if I am not the only person with
> this problem that someone hasn't solved it long ago.
>
> May be I am doing something wrong.
>
> I am using CVS as a form of software delivery rather than
> a joint software development.
>
> On my machine, I have gimp-1.1.15. If I choose to update it,
> I need a patch 1.1.15 -> <current level>.
>
> So far as I can tell, only patches for
> <previous level> -> <current level>
> are archived.
>
> 1. Why not archive patches from say 1.1.11 -> <current level> whenever
> there is a new levels for levels 1.1.12 < level < 1.1.20?
>
> 2. If this is not thought possible or desirable, why not have a web
> CVS interface that can deliver any required patch on request.
> (I thought that bonsai did this, but I cannot get it to).
>
> I assume that I have got something wrong somewhere, but I cannot
> see what.
>
> Ben.
>
>
>
>
