Update of /cvsroot/sbcl/sbcl
In directory sfp-cvsdas-3.v30.ch3.sourceforge.com:/tmp/cvs-serv24747
220.127.116.11: comment on patch submission formats in STYLE
Also edit the prose from I -> we at least in a few places to
RCS file: /cvsroot/sbcl/sbcl/STYLE,v
retrieving revision 18.104.22.168
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -d -r22.214.171.124 -r1.2
--- STYLE 18 Sep 2000 01:26:30 -0000 126.96.36.199
+++ STYLE 17 Aug 2010 12:21:32 -0000 1.2
@@ -1,9 +1,42 @@
+SBCL Style Guide
+ (This is not a most actively maintained file, but recommended
+ reading anyways.)
+Preferred patch format is output from "git format-patch", but unified
+diffs and links to public git repos are acceptable as well.
+Please include test-cases in your patch if possible.
+Please format your submission for ease of reading: unless the change
+is whitespace only, avoid re-indenting code you are not touching, etc.
+Unless your patch is large and best understood as a series of
+sequential changes, please send it in as single patch file.
+If your patch includes algorithmic changes, explain them. If your
+patch uses a published algorithm, please include a link to the paper.
+We aren't always as well-educated as we'd like to...
+Patches can be either mailed to sbcl-devel, or submitted via
+Launchpad. If you submit a patch on Launchpad, please add the tag
+"review" to the associated bug.
+If you have any questions, feel free to ask them on sbcl-devel.
+See also PRINCIPLES and TLA files.
Most of the style hints in the Lisp FAQ apply.
-When porting the system, I would really prefer code which factors
-dependencies into a set of interface functions and constants and
-includes implementations of the interface for the different systems.
-Patches which require conditional compilation (like all the old
+When porting code we prefer code which factors dependencies into a set
+of interface functions and constants and includes implementations of
+the interface for the different systems. Patches which require
+conditional compilation (like all the old
#T+HPUX or #T-X86 tests in the sources inherited from CMUCL) might be
accepted if they're simple, in hopes of factoring out the differences
more cleanly later, but even if accepted, such code may not be
@@ -94,6 +127,6 @@
(DEFUN CL:CADDDR (..) ..) as reminders that they're required by
ANSI and can't be deleted no matter how obscure and useless some
of them might look.:-)
-Most of these are common in the code inherited from CMUCL. I've
+Most of these are common in the code inherited from CMUCL. We've
eliminated them in some places, but there's a *lot* of code inherited
RCS file: /cvsroot/sbcl/sbcl/version.lisp-expr,v
retrieving revision 1.4963
retrieving revision 1.4964
diff -u -d -r1.4963 -r1.4964
--- version.lisp-expr 17 Aug 2010 11:35:24 -0000 1.4963
+++ version.lisp-expr 17 Aug 2010 12:21:32 -0000 1.4964
@@ -17,4 +17,4 @@
;;; checkins which aren't released. (And occasionally for internal
;;; versions, especially for internal versions off the main CVS
;;; branch, it gets hairier, e.g. "0.pre7.14.flaky4.13".)