Bug 632594 created; review, approval, commit requested
tbullock at nd.edu
Wed Oct 20 13:39:16 EDT 2010
Hi Geert and Yawar,
> On the other hand, your patch as seen in bugzilla doesn't contain
> modifications to gnucash-guide.xml, so I wonder how you interpreted
> reply as if you are not allowed to change that file.
Looking back on your discussion in this email and my current version of changes.patch, I can conclude only that I seem to have lost my way.
When I ran the first svn diff I found many changes needed to gnucash-guide.xml. Cristian Marchi's reply let me find the way to correct those. I ran another xmllint and found still 2 more xml errors. I fixed those and thought they would be in the next diff output. Part of what confused me is that my changes.patch (the one attached to the bug) had to have been changed by both Cristian's svn updates and my own. In the last instance the ch_basics.xml file now has changes to fix line breaks, which is different than the original content of that file. That probably happened either to Yawar or Cristian doing svn updates. I say that the release number had changed but I did not appreciate the significance of that. I believe that was a big yellow light for me to stop and examine what had changed from my expectations. So I learned something from this exercise.
> I can only assume this is what happened:
> 1. you had fixed a number of xmllint errors in your local working
> 2. at about the same time, Cristian committed his work in r19679,
> which among
> others also fixes the same xmllint errors.
> 3. you dutifully ran svn update before creating your final patch. This
> update pulled in the final xmllint fixes that Cristian had just
> Since your local fixes were the same as in the online svn repo, svn
> marked these local changes as in sync with the online repo. In other
> your local fixes wouldn't appear in the subsequent svn diff, because
> they were
> already in the online repository.
> 4. You ran svn diff to create the patch, still assuming there would be
> fixes in it.
I believe your analysis is correct.
> The overview will always show continuous numbering even if you delete
> chapter. The chapter numbering is dynamic. At best you could see the
> number has gone missing.
I did not know that either. It sounds strange. I expect if chapter 14 is missing, its number would be skipped. Elsewhere in the documentation you have to refer to each specific chapter if you want it mentioned.
> You could check in your original xml file if you have still linkends
> for both
> chapter_bus_pay and chapter_budgets. The patch suggests you don't.
You are exactly right -- chapter_bus_pay was missing there! This is really sneaky, at least for the uninitiated. Well, I have been burned. Thanks for explaining how it happened. I see why you or John early on suggested running many small patches rather than few large ones. It is very easy to get tripped up.
> By the way, if you run svn status, do any of your files have a "C"
> state ?
> Those should always be fixed before making a patch. Read up on
> resolution in the subversion book if you need help with that .
>  http://svnbook.red-
No, mine are "?" or "M"
Thank you for the careful review of my issues. I will try to be more careful as I go forward.
More information about the gnucash-devel