Fyi patch submission information on wiki updated for GitHub

[Misha Koshelev]

On Mon, 2010-07-19 at 22:48 -0600, Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> On 07/19/2010 08:59 PM, Misha Koshelev wrote:
> > Unfortunately, the more intuitive
> > git format-patch -k --stdout HEAD~79..HEAD~78>  /tmp/patch.old
> >
> > does not seem to result in patches that can be properly applied onto a
> > different (upstream) remote (see below).
> 
> Works fine here. You must have had some additional changes between upstream 
> and HEAD~79. Or your tree diverged from the origin (you had some of your 
> patches merged and not rebased) which is the same as above.
> 
> And you should really be using "--attach". It's always the better option, 
> especially for the series of patches.
> 
> Vitaliy

Dear Vitaliy and all:

I have spent some time investigating this.

I have created an entirely new GitHub fork and, indeed, the two
statements:
a) git format-patch -n --attach --stdout HEAD~80..HEAD~79
b) git format-patch -k -o out upstream/stable..origin
seem to result in patches that apply to wine-git in this case.

I have also spent some time updating the GitHub information on the
GitWine wiki, and I believe it should now be streamlined and correct:
http://wiki.winehq.org/GitWine#head-0e6d3133a16d3a26de956c500675e5e623462a9e

I am still not quite sure why I had this divergence between patches
generated using (a) and (b) in my previous GitHub fork, but my guess is
that this comes from using git merge rather than git rebase when
updating my repository to match upstream Wine. In any case, I will have
to wait and see whether this happens again.

Finally, thanks to some helpful comments from others, I will try to
contain my enthusiasm and not send so many emails to wine-devel. I will
restrict myself to major milestones & such.

Thank you all for your help!
Misha