RE: [boost] Policy/ethics question: correcting 'trivial' errors i n others' code?

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (alexy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-16 19:31:24

Beman Dawes wrote:
> > >   While looking at some of the regression testing failures on the
> > > dashboard (see my earlier post), I've noticed that many errors are 
> > > trivial to fix.
> > > Should we fix the errors in CVS immediately or construct a patch, 
> > > notify the author, and wait for approval? What if the author does 
> > > not respond in a timely manner? Some of these problems really 
> > > are trivial, e.g., look at the failures for the "compose" library, 
> > > where there is a #include "compose.hpp" that should be 
> > > #include <boost/compose.hpp>.
> > >
> > >   Any guidelines on this?
> >
> > The usual practice is that editorial errors like the above can be 
> > fixed without consulting anyone, but that you should err on the 
> > side of asking the author. One thing you can do is to check in a 
> > branch and ask the author to approve it before you merge.
> 
> I suppose we ought to write up the guidelines.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/message/20428? 

(Peter Dimov had some corrections to these, please see the follow-ups)

Aleksey