Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

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

 



On 09/19/2016 07:27 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> On 09/08/2016 01:25 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>> I'd move it temporarily to t4061 with a separate SQUASH??? at the
>>>> tip for now, as I am running out of time today.
>>>
>>> I didn't realize you were waiting for an ACK. Yes, it's totally OK to
>>> rename the test.
>>
>> I actually wasn't asking for an Ack.
>>
>> As the issue was in the one that is buried a few commits from the
>> tip, and there is a later one that adds more tests to it, I didn't
>> find enough energy to rename the new file in a buried commit and
>> then adjust the patch later updates it, I was hoping that you'd
>> reroll to save me effort, rather than forcing me to do the rebase
>> myself ;-).
> 
> Now I did, so no need to resend (unless you have changes other than
> the renaming of the test script, that is).

Thanks for taking care of this.

> Let's move it down to 'next' soonish.

Yes, it would be good to get feedback early enough in the cycle that we
can make a final decision about which diff heuristics should be used by
default and whether/what UI to implement for switching between them.

Michael




[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]