Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > 2012/7/23 Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>: >> I do not understand why many of these have Stefano's S-o-b in them. >> If you are relaying what Stefano originally wrote, then the author >> (i.e. "From: ") and the first S-o-b would say Stefano, and your >> S-o-b will follow it, but that is probably not the case. >> I'll drop the S-o-b lines for now. > > It is because Stefano offers lots of help for correcting syntax errors > and misspellings in the original commit logs. Should I use Reviewed-by > tag instead of S-o-b? Yeah, I guessed that you meant reviewed-by. > And in PATCH 3/7, there is a Ævar's S-o-b, it is because the workaround > comes from Ævar's idea. This one I remember the previous round, so didn't have any problem. >> By the way, is there any existing test that needs to gain GETTEXT_POISON >> or test_i18ncmp with this change? > > I find one test case failed, and correct it in PATCH 3/7. That test used i18ncmp already, so the update to expected string would be sufficient. I was worried if there were existing tests that have been expecting that the output from am/rebase/merge would not be i18n'ised and using "test_cmp expect actual" to compare their output with expected result. -- 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