On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 17:21 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Paul Bolle <pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Git apply doesn't need a git repo. It is designed to be a patch replacement. > > Interesting. I wasn't aware of that. Seems odd? Apparently a conscious decision: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/24/520 > > (There's probably a lot of legacy stuff patch handles that "git apply" > > doesn't, but no-one cares.) > > True, but I guess I wonder why they bothered designing a patch > replacement to begin with. Kill dependencies on other projects? By getting people to use "git apply" instead of patch they are pushed towards the place where it's obvious to ask why they even bother with patches (once they realize they're applying patches that patch itself can't even handle). And it's jut clone and fetch and pull and whatever thereafter. Dunno. I'm speculating here as Google was of no use to me here. Thanks, Paul Bolle _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
