how to correct/patch documentation?

[Ben Abbott]

On Feb 18, 2008, at 9:51 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:

> On 18-Feb-2008, Ben Abbott wrote:
>
> |
> | On Feb 18, 2008, at 2:58 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
> |
> | > I think it would be better if you committed changes to your  
> local hg
> | > archive and then used "hg export" to generate changesets.
> | >
> | > jwe
> |
> | I've invested my evening browsing the Mercurial wiki, and am now  
> able
> | commit to my local archive and export changesets. I assume you'll  
> want
> | the exported information as well as a separate ChangeLog, correct?
>
> No, now I would prefer the ChangeLog as part of the patch.  Often it
> won't apply cleanly, but hg makes it relatively easy for me to deal
> with fixing that up, and overall it is now much easier to handle
> patches if everything is included in an hg changeset.
>
> jwe

Ok.

Two more questions.

(1) I have a few lingering patches what were submitted by email, but  
not yet committed. Do you prefer them to be resubmitted? Do you prefer  
emails with patches to have something like "[PATCH]" in the subject  
line? ... I've not been consistent regarding that, which can't be a  
good thing.

(2) CVS was a hassle when new files were to be added to the project. I  
haven't yet tried, or even looked ... but will that process run  
smoother now?

Ben