On Friday 30 July 2004 01:27 pm, Dave Robillard wrote: > On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 05:09, Thorsten Wilms wrote: -snip- -snip- > > (Thanks for that, by the way, I totally forgot about subpatches) > > > To make it all perfect there should be a versioning system, > > but I guess that's a bit much to ask for :) > > Versioning as in CVS for patch files? Well.. yeah, that is a bit much > to ask for. :) > > Put your patches in a CVS repository. Done. (They will be xml and CVS > will handle it nicely). CVS is actually a lot simpler to use than many > people give it credit for, for simple things like this anyway. Heheh, thanks guy, I hadn't thought of that. FWIW, one can handle binaries with CVS too. Files have to be flagged as such (or CVS has to be configured to associate file extensions for binaries) and it takes a lot more space than text, but it works. So, how about having the "save" bits be smart enough to hand things off to CVS? Could be the mother of all patch librarians.
