2012-10-21 Martin Taendl <taendl@gmx.at>

#1 Open

Bitbucket cannot automatically merge this request.

The commits that make up this pull request have been removed.

Bitbucket cannot automatically merge this request due to conflicts.

Review the conflicts on the Overview tab. You can then either decline the request or merge it manually on your local system using the following commands:

hg update default
hg pull -r default https://bitbucket.org/taendl/dimeforktaendl
hg merge 37ecaa499d1b
hg commit -m 'Merged in taendl/dimeforktaendl (pull request #1)'
  1. Martin Tändl

I am new to bitbucket and mercurial and hope that this pull request is suited for the following purpose:

I tried to fix four bugs in dime, but I am not sure if my fixes are o. k. and I would like to have them reviewed by someone familiar with dime. The bugs and the fixes are described in the commited files and I also created some minimal DXF-files for reproducing dime's behaviour I regard es being wrong. Furthermore, I found and described two more "bugs", but could not fix them.

Of course, I will modify the cpp files as far as required (removing fprintfs and comments etc.) and remove the test files and README's before the final pull request.

If I should have used another method to report these bugs, please let me know!

Thanks in advance, Martin

Comments (1)

  1. Bastiaan Veelo

    Thank you for your thorough work, Martin, I am sorry it was unattended to for so long. Your approach was correct in absence of the issue tracker; I enabled the issue tracker just now. Possibly it would have been a bit better to submit the fixes in separate PRs, though, using separate commits.

    I am not a dime user myself, and no-one else has reviewed in all these years. If you still read this and are willing to give this another pass then we could consider to split it up in separate issues, move the text from Changes.taendl there and maybe also the testfiles. Using Mercurial it would always be possible to see the commit message and a reference to the issue, for future reference. However I totally understand if you think the extra work is not worth your time, and in that case I would just accept and merge this PR as it is, as I believe we are better off with it that without.

    Thanks, Bastiaan.