+@c ------------------------------------------------------------
+
+@node Reviewing Patches
+@section Reviewing Patches
+
+Once the commitment message posted (@pxref{Checking in a Revision}), it
+must be reviewed: @emph{every single patch should be reviewed}.
+
+The purpose of the review is of course to look for errors, typos,
+unclear documentation or ChangeLog, incorrect coding style, or even
+better implementation suggestion and so forth.
+
+If there is nothing to report about the patch, just reply ``Ok'',
+quoting only the ChangeLog.  Usually the thread ends there.
+
+If there are issues to report, quote only relevant portions of the
+patch.  If you have several big issues to report, you might want to make
+separate replies to split the thread.  The author of the patch must
+answer to these comments, and if subsequent commits address some of
+these issues, the reply should refer to them (e.g., by giving the
+revision number).
+
+Anybody is welcome to comment a patch, nevertheless, this responsibility
+typically falls upon the shoulders of the project maintainer, or the
+code-review peer of the author of the patch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Index: ChangeLog
from  Akim Demaille  <akim(a)epita.fr>
	* Makefile.am (.texi.txt, MAKEINFOTEXT, AM_MAKEINFOTEXTFLAGS):
	New.
	* maintain.texi (Maintaining ChangeLog): Now section of...
	(Maintaining Projects): this new chapter.
	(Checking in a Revision, Reviewing Patches): New.
Index: Makefile.am
--- Makefile.am Wed, 21 Apr 2004 11:37:53 +0200 akim (lrde-maintain/5_Makefile.a 1.1 644)
+++ Makefile.am Thu, 29 Apr 2004 14:35:59 +0200 akim (lrde-maintain/5_Makefile.a 1.1 644)
@@ -26,10 +26,43 @@
   --fill-column=76				\
   --no-split
 
+# Work around makeinfo's lack of I18n support.
+MAKEINFO = LC_ALL=C @MAKEINFO@
+
+
+## ----------------- ##
+## Texinfo -> Text.  ##
+## ----------------- ##
+
 TXTS = maintain.txt
 
 CLEANFILES = *.txt
 
+MAKEINFOTEXT = $(MAKEINFO) --plaintext
+AM_MAKEINFOTEXTFLAGS = $(AM_MAKEINFOFLAGS)
+
+# Shamelessly stolen from Automake's .texi.info
+.texi.txt:
+	restore=: && \
+	backup="$(am__leading_dot)am$$$$" && \
+	if test -f $@; then \
+	  mv $@ $$backup; \
+	  restore=mv; \
+	fi; \
+	if $(MAKEINFOTEXT) $(AM_MAKEINFOTEXTFLAGS) $(MAKEINFOTEXTFLAGS) -I $(srcdir) \
+	 -o $@ $<; \
+	then \
+	  rc=0; \
+	  cd $(srcdir); \
+	else \
+	  rc=$$?; \
+	  cd $(srcdir) && \
+	  $$restore $$backup `echo "./$@" | sed 's|[^/]*$$||'`; \
+	fi; \
+	rm -f $$backup; \
+	exit $$rc
+
+
 
 ## ---------------- ##
 ## Building diffs.  ##
@@ -42,7 +75,7 @@
   -I '(line'
 
 diff diffs: diffs.patch
-diffs.patch: assignments.txt tiger.txt
+diffs.patch: maintain.txt
 	-diff -u -w $(IGNORES) --from=$(DESTDIR)$(wwwdir) $(TXTS) >$@
 	cat $@
 
Index: maintain.texi
--- maintain.texi Wed, 21 Apr 2004 12:20:31 +0200 akim (lrde-maintain/6_maintain.t 1.2 644)
+++ maintain.texi Thu, 29 Apr 2004 14:20:10 +0200 akim (lrde-maintain/6_maintain.t 1.2 644)
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 @settitle Maintaining LRDE Projects
 
 @c This date is auto-magically updated when you save this file:
-@set lastupdate April 21, 2004
+@set lastupdate April 29, 2004
 @set gccversion 3.2
 @c $Format: "@set version $ProjectVersion$"$
 
@@ -61,13 +61,19 @@
 
 @contents
 @menu
-* Introduction::
-* Maintaining ChangeLog::
-* Appendices::
+* Introduction::                About this document
+* Maintaining Projects::        Coding styles, guidelines etc.
+* Appendices::                  Copying this document, Indices
 
 @detailmenu
  --- The Detailed Node Listing ---
 
+Maintaining Projects
+
+* Maintaining ChangeLog::       Recording the history of changes
+* Checking in a Revision::      Recording a revision of a project
+* Reviewing Patches::           Controlling the quality of patches
+
 Maintaining @file{ChangeLog}
 
 * What and How::                What are ChangeLogs
@@ -88,11 +94,21 @@
 @node Introduction
 @chapter Introduction
 
-
 @c ======================================================================
 
+@node Maintaining Projects
+@chapter Maintaining Projects
+
+@menu
+* Maintaining ChangeLog::       Recording the history of changes
+* Checking in a Revision::      Recording a revision of a project
+* Reviewing Patches::           Controlling the quality of patches
+@end menu
+
+@c ------------------------------------------------------------
+
 @node Maintaining ChangeLog
-@chapter Maintaining @file{ChangeLog}
+@section Maintaining @file{ChangeLog}
 
 This page contains a summary of the most important things to know about
 the Change Log entries.  The main source of information remains the
@@ -107,7 +123,7 @@
 @end menu
 
 @node What and How
-@section What and How
+@subsection What and How
 
 Document @emph{any} change you have made.  This will make bug hunting
 easier, and this will help other people to follow the development.
@@ -124,7 +140,7 @@
 @end example
 
 @node ChangeLog Do
-@section ChangeLog Do
+@subsection ChangeLog Do
 
 @itemize @minus
 @item
@@ -155,7 +171,7 @@
 
 
 @node ChangeLog Don't
-@section ChangeLog Don't
+@subsection ChangeLog Don't
 
 @itemize @minus
 @item
@@ -185,7 +201,7 @@
 @end itemize
 
 @node Emacs and ChangeLog
-@section Emacs and ChangeLog
+@subsection Emacs and ChangeLog
 
 @itemize @minus
 @item
@@ -203,6 +219,40 @@
 @key{RET}}.
 @end itemize
 
+@c ------------------------------------------------------------
+
+@node Checking in a Revision
+@section Checking in a Revision
+
+@c ------------------------------------------------------------
+
+@node Reviewing Patches
+@section Reviewing Patches
+
+Once the commitment message posted (@pxref{Checking in a Revision}), it
+must be reviewed: @emph{every single patch should be reviewed}.
+
+The purpose of the review is of course to look for errors, typos,
+unclear documentation or ChangeLog, incorrect coding style, or even
+better implementation suggestion and so forth.
+
+If there is nothing to report about the patch, just reply ``Ok'',
+quoting only the ChangeLog.  Usually the thread ends there.
+
+If there are issues to report, quote only relevant portions of the
+patch.  If you have several big issues to report, you might want to make
+separate replies to split the thread.  The author of the patch must
+answer to these comments, and if subsequent commits address some of
+these issues, the reply should refer to them (e.g., by giving the
+revision number).
+
+Anybody is welcome to comment a patch, nevertheless, this responsibility
+typically falls upon the shoulders of the project maintainer, or the
+code-review peer of the author of the patch.
+
+
+
+
 @c ========================================================== Appendices
 
 @node Appendices