Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> I remember discussing things with Timo and was putting it on >> hold since I knew you were also actively futzing on gitweb. > > So when I apply someone else patches should I reply to the post > with patch I have applied with > > Acked-by: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> > > to notify of that fact? Acked-by does not mean you've applied it to your tree, and even if it did, it is unfair to expect me to remember that fact when I review your patch later. In this particular case, a note in the patch to say it depends on such and such that _I_ do not seem to have yet would have been more appropriate. Acked-by would also be helpful when a de-facto owner of the code wants to push acceptance of others' patches, but that is independent from stating what a patch's prerequisites are. Anyhow, I've reviewed Timo's patch (which made sense to me too), and your whitespace fixes and pushed out the result, which hopefully will be propagating to the mirrors soon. Overall, I would say that the clean-up on gitweb so far is reasonably straightforward. I have been running "next" version of gitweb on my private machine and haven't found regression. I'll go to bed now. Thanks for the patches. - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html