On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 10:24:55AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote: > Am 5/5/2011 17:46, schrieb Junio C Hamano: > > Kacper Kornet <kornet@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Should the patch be based on main or on the previous patch that was > >> merged to next? > > After having this much discussion, it is preferrable to have a patch > > relative to what you have in 'next' (2910bf5) as a fix-up, explaining "The > > initial version does not cover these cases / has these problems" to > > summarize the discussion so far, followed by explanation of the > > incremental change "Fix this and that by doing ...". > > We could revert what is in 'next' and start from scratch, but then it is > > likely that the thought process will be lost when you write the log > > message. > I'd implement it like this, discarding Kacper's patch, but I'm not sure > whether the commit message summarizes the discussion sufficiently. Let me > know whether you want a version based on top of Kacper's patch, or how > else to proceed. > Of your two patches regarding configure --sysconfdir, only the second > (e8de44bc05) is needed on top of this patch. I'm afraid e8de44bc05 was lost somewhere, as 1.7.5.3 does not contain it. -- Kacper Kornet -- 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