Re: Idea: "git format-patch" should get more information out of git

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jeff King venit, vidit, dixit 30.08.2011 17:22:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 02:21:13PM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:
...
>> Anyways, notes survive rebase etc.
> 
> You still have to manually configure:
> 
>   git config notes.rewriteRef refs/notes/commits
> 
> Perhaps that is something that should be changed.

Right, I've done that quite a while ago and forgot.

>> and at format-patch time you can decide whether you want to include
>> them or not (with my patch).
> 
> Yeah. Don't get me wrong, I think putting "---" notes into git-notes is
> way more flexible. It's just that it's also more complex, and
> unnecessarily so for many use cases.
> 
> We have some patches to hide that complexity, but I was at one point
> wondering if all of the complexity was worthwhile. But as I mentioned
> above, if you want to build anything more complex than a pure-patch
> workflow, the simple solution breaks down. So it probably is worth
> pursuing.

Reminds me of the ref namespace restructuring which could help sharing
notes... Oh, lots to do before git 3.0!

Michael
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]