Hi, I'm not sure if this is a good idea or not, but at least it's an interesting experiment.
For the following reasons... - It's easier to maintain and update separate versions/features using vcs branches rather then separate patch files. (unless all the patches posted are generated by vcs systems, but in that case we should at least publish the corresponding branches) - by merging branches you can more easily mix featuresets - tested and committed source feels more safe and robust then patches which may not always apply or function as expected - I personally like git and am not interested in learning hg ...I made a git-based dmenu mirror @ https://github.com/Dieterbe/dmenu The master branch contains an exact copy of the official hg repository (using the hg-git bridge) separate branches are made for the separate patches. I'm not sure if other folks like git, but at least the idea of maintaining alternate versions through vcs branches seems pretty beneficial to me. Dieter
