On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 03:21:20PM -0500, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 14:55, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > * jn/makefile (2010-01-06) 4 commits > > - - Makefile: consolidate .FORCE-* targets > > - - Makefile: learn to generate listings for targets requiring special flags > > - - Makefile: use target-specific variable to pass flags to cc > > - - Makefile: regenerate assembler listings when asked > > + (merged to 'next' on 2010-01-10 at f5a5d42) > > + + Makefile: consolidate .FORCE-* targets > > + + Makefile: learn to generate listings for targets requiring special flags > > + + Makefile: use target-specific variable to pass flags to cc > > + + Makefile: regenerate assembler listings when asked > > Fwiw, I find it harder to read due to the now ambiguous meaning of the > + and - (it could either mean something is in pu/next, or that the > topic changed). Of course this is partly caused by the fact that I > don't read emails in fixed font (by default), but perhaps it's worth > considering using different symbols for pu/next-ness? I agree. Plus line-by-line is not necessarily the most efficient way to convey the information that a single character changed. If the subject of the commit didn't change, it would be easier to see soemething like: ->+ Makefile: consolidate .FORCE-* targets ->+ Makefile: learn to generate listings for targets requiring special flags etc (where ">" is supposed to indicate transition, but it's actually quite ugly itself). That being said, I don't personally see the incremental format as all that useful. If I want to see increments of what's happening, I use git itself. The "What's Cooking" message to me is about seeing a survey of all topics, even those that haven't changed, with Junio's comments. So you may take my suggestions with a large grain of salt. :) -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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