I agree that those that are interesting should make it to the digest. I can at least speak for myself that that audience I know of the commit digest probably would not be all that interested in a build fix unless it was a long standing issue. Perhaps we can start a collaborative document to put together an Inclusion Guideline?<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Alexander van Loon <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:a.vanloon@alexandervanloon.nl">a.vanloon@alexandervanloon.nl</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Sorry for flooding the mailing list, but I simply have a lot of<br>
questions. This one concerns the commits related to KDE on Windows. I’ve<br>
seen a lot of commits in the directory<br>
<a href="http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/kdesupport/emerge/portage/" target="_blank">http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/kdesupport/emerge/portage/</a> during the<br>
reviewing process.<br>
<br>
I thought it was something Gentoo specific because of emerge and<br>
portage, but it appears that’s merely software which is used for the<br>
Windows build of KDE –<br>
<a href="http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/kdesupport/emerge/README?view=markup" target="_blank">http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/kdesupport/emerge/README?view=markup</a> – but<br>
even so, I wasn’t sure if the nature of the commits was interesting<br>
enough in every case, most of the time they’re build fixes which don’t<br>
seem to be interesting at all.<br>
<br>
So I haven’t been consistent with including and excluding these commits.<br>
Can we reach an agreement on when to include or exclude them and<br>
formulate a guideline for the Inclusion Guidelines?<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Digest mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Digest@kde.org">Digest@kde.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digest" target="_blank">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digest</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>