From bb72f96532d75c3f61c3cd18be71d544848df669 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: hertzog <hertzog@313b444b-1b9f-4f58-a734-7bb04f332e8d>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 10:08:25 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] - Also mentions sending patchs in the BSP section.

git-svn-id: svn://anonscm.debian.org/ddp/manuals/trunk/developers-reference@1817 313b444b-1b9f-4f58-a734-7bb04f332e8d
---
 developers-reference.sgml | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/developers-reference.sgml b/developers-reference.sgml
index 7bc7c88..22d739d 100644
--- a/developers-reference.sgml
+++ b/developers-reference.sgml
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
   <!entity % commondata  SYSTEM "common.ent" > %commondata;
 
   <!-- CVS revision of this document -->
-  <!entity cvs-rev "$Revision: 1.129 $">
+  <!entity cvs-rev "$Revision: 1.130 $">
   <!-- if you are translating this document, please notate the CVS
        revision of the developers reference here -->
   <!--
@@ -3182,7 +3182,10 @@ NMU withour prior notice if they upload their NMU to
 DELAYED/3-day at least. All other NMU rules applies as usually, they
 should send the patch of the NMU in the BTS (in one of the open bugs
 fixed by the NMU or in a new bug tagged fixed). They should
-also respect the maintainer's wishes if he expressed some. 
+also respect the maintainer's wishes if he expressed some.
+	<p>
+If someone doesn't feel confident with an NMU, he should just send a patch
+to the BTS. It's far better than a broken NMU.
 
     <sect id="mia-qa">Dealing with unreachable maintainers
       <p>
-- 
2.30.2