Thank you for reconsider my patch! As you said, my implementation is not good while the idea is not bad. I checked out the latest git source code and patch it with your replacement, and it looks nice, I like it. This patch comes from my real need. And I think someone may need it as well. To be honest, this is my first submitted patch in my life. On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:51 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jundong Xue <tomxue0126@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> tomxue@ubuntu:~/mycode/life$ git todo >> * d768da9 - (in the future: 3 hours later) Meeting with vendor ― Tom >> Xue (HEAD, master) >> * 5fcd556 - (in the future: 12 days later) Take my personal holiday ― Tom Xue >> * 9dd280b - (in the future: 11 months later) 端午节 ― Tom Xue >> * 4680099 - (in the future: 9 months later) 清明节 ― Tom Xue >> * 59d5266 - (in the future: 8 months later) 元宵节 ― Tom Xue >> * b5308da - (in the future: 7 months later) 除夕 ― Tom Xue >> ... > > I was re-reading the backlog and after looking at it again, I do not > think what the patch tries to do is a bad thing. There are changes > I want to see _how_ it is done, though. > > Especially, the duplication of the exact same logic in the future > and in the past is an unmaintainable mess. > > I have queued a replacement in 'pu'. -- 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