Hi! This caught my eye...
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2011-12-05 20:21: > * HACKING (Administrivia): If a commit fixes a bug registered at GNU > debbugs, its bug number be reported in the ChangeLog entry. Re-order > the entries to give more visibility to the advice on how to verify > that a commit really fixes a bug. > (Working with git): Improve advice about which pre-existing branch > a topic branch should be based on. > --- > HACKING | 16 +++++++++------- > 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING > index 873243c..c01445f 100644 > --- a/HACKING > +++ b/HACKING > @@ -10,12 +10,18 @@ > ================================================================ > = Administrivia > > +* The correct response to most actual bugs is to write a new test case > + which demonstrates the bug. Then fix the bug, re-run the test suite, > + and check everything in. > + > * If you incorporate a change from somebody on the net: > First, if it is a large change, you must make sure they have signed the > appropriate paperwork. > Second, be sure to add their name and email address to THANKS > > * If a change fixes a test, mention the test in the ChangeLog entry. > + If a change fixes a bug registered in the Automake debbugs tracker, > + mention the bug number in the ChangeLog entry. *snip* There is now no longer any mention of the case where a change fixes a test, but where there is no open bug to mention. Was that intended? Also, the asterisk went missing. Cheers, Peter
