A whole load of random patches

[N.C. Wilson]

Sorry. That makes perfect sense. I'll split it up soon. I was not keeping 
track of the changes as I did them because it started out as just general 
fiddling trying to get to know the amarok code for the first time, fixing 
things as I went.

Nicholas

On Wednesday 02 January 2008 12:40 pm Nikolaj Hald Nielsen wrote:
> Nicholas,
>
> It looks like you have put a lot of work into this, and we all really
> appreciate it. In general though, we dont accept patches that changes
> more than one thing at once, as they are simply to hard to read
> through for us. Also by having one huge patch, you run the risk of us
> not beign able to commit all of it because some small part is wrong/a
> bad idea/counter to the general design.
>
> As I would really like to se many of your fixes and improvements
> committed, there are two things we can do. The best option is for you
> to create a set of patches instead of one monster patch. If your
> changes dot overlap each other too much, this should be relatively
> simple to do. Another option is that I could *try* to read through it
> and, if I can get someone else to give a second oppinion, maybe commit
> it as is. The problem with the second approach is that it wil take a
> relatively long time ( I dont have time to look at it today ), and we
> risk that parallel changes to the code in svn will make parts of the
> patch not apply cleanly, and trying to fix those kind of issues with a
> patch this size is something I would _really_ like to avoid.
>
> To sum up, I am sure you have done great work, and I am most
> definitively going to try it out myself, but the format of your patch
> causes us some serious issues. I hope you are not too discouraged by
> this. If you need any help splitting up your patch, or you have any
> other question, drop by our channel #amarok on irc.freenode.net
>
> - Nikolaj