Hmmm. This is strange. I was given commit privileges specifically for doing extensive work on doc/slime.texi. CVS lets me log in alright and seems to accept the changes - prompts me for comments and everything.

But I just checked out a fresh copy and none of the changes I made this month (several sessions) are there. And yet, the changes I made in December are there (for example, the image on the front page). I don't know what to make of it.

I'm going to post a patch to the list which incorporates the changes you made plus those I've made. (attached)

Here's a changelog entry for it:

2007-01-14 Jeff Cunningham jeffrey@cunningham.net

* doc/slime.texi: Update of function/key index with links.

--Jeff

On Sun Jan 14, 2007 at 07:54:38PM -0800, Bill Clementson wrote:

Hi Jeff,

On 1/14/07, Jeffrey Cunningham jeffrey@cunningham.net wrote:

...

On Sun Jan 14, 2007 at 05:10:32PM -0800, Bill Clementson wrote:

...

Attached is a patch for slime-texi. Here's the changelog entry:

2007-01-14 Bill Clementson billclem@gmail.com

  * doc/slime.texi: Cleanup of documentation typos/errors.

Hi Bill;

I noticed your patch is applied against doc/slime.texi from Jan 1 whereas I checked a number of changes into CVS for that file on Jan 11. Should I do something beyond email the list that I have made changes? I am unfamiliar with what is customary in this list. Should I also send out a patch as you have done?

I applied your patch to my current version and it worked fine.

I did a cvs update before I made the changes to slime.texi, so my patch should be against the latest version of slime.texi. Looking at the changelog, it appears that the last patch to slime.texi was made on 2006-12-24, so I don't know what happened to your changes. I just did a "cvs co slime" as well to see what I got on a fresh install and the date on slime.texi is also 2006-12-24. Perhaps your changes were never applied? Since there are a limited number of people with commit privileges, it's generally a good idea to double-check that any patch that you email in is actually applied as sometimes they "fall through the cracks".

-- Bill Clementson