Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I've sent a couple of other patches to git-send-email. > > http://marc.info/?l=git&m=131190328311281&w=2 > http://marc.info/?l=git&m=131131975804893&w=2 > > Any comments or plans to ack/nack those? Sorry, but I am not personally interested in send-email enough to go to marc.info archive that does not give me the message in ready-to-apply format with "git am". On-list discussion is the most important signal I use to convince myself that the issues that discussed patches attempt to tackle are worth addressing. When I do not see any discussion, I myself may decide that they are important, or I may not. Re-sending them might get others with similar needs for the patches involved in the discussion. Here are what _I_ think about the above two. - I've seen enough complaints that send-email sends too many Cc:s to unintended parties, and of an opinion that these extra recipients should be added to the files you feed to send-email as headers, instead of adding noise to commit log messages, so adding new Cc sources and then giving a way to suppress them didn't look like a good change to me. - I think I saw a few positive responses to the "editor cruft" patch, but the way the patch was implemented, it will invite low-value "my obscure editor uses this pattern, so add it" follow-up patches, and compared to that downside, I didn't like the benefit of the patch well enough to pick it up. -- 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