<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">[...] publishing patches by referring to a remote repository,<br></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
rather than uploading the diff.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Is this a recommended workflow at this point, or should we generate/attach patch files still? Both, for experimentation? </div><div><br></div>~/santa<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:15 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:martin@v.loewis.de">martin@v.loewis.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">> As a mercurial user, I thank you for this effort! One question,<br>
> where/how do I send suggestion to what to add into .hgignore file? In<br>
> particular, I found these dynamically generated files after a build in<br>
> Windows (3.2) that probably should be entered as .hgignore entries:<br>
<br>
</div>All patches should go to the bug tracker. If you host a clone somewhere,<br>
you could start publishing patches by referring to a remote repository,<br>
rather than uploading the diff. I'm curious how this DVCS thing works<br>
out for contributors.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<font color="#888888">Martin<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>