Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] tag: only respect `pager.tag` in list-mode

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

 



On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 07:44:27PM +0200, Martin Ågren wrote:

> On 31 July 2017 at 05:46, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 08:17:42PM +0200, Martin Ågren wrote:
> >
> >> On 21 July 2017 at 00:27, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > I tend to agree with you that 1-3/10 may be better off being a
> >> > single patch (or 3/10 dropped, as Brandon is working on losing it
> >> > nearby).  I would have expected 7-8/10 to be a single patch, as by
> >> > the time a reader reaches 07/10, because of the groundwork laid by
> >> > 04-06/10, it is obvious that the general direction is to allow the
> >> > caller, i.e. cmd_tag(), to make a call to setup_auto_pager() only in
> >> > some but not all circumstances, and 07/10 being faithful to the
> >> > original behaviour (only to be updated in 08/10) is somewhat counter
> >> > intuitive.  It is not wrong per-se; it was just unexpected.
> >>
> >> Thanks for your comments. I will be away for a few days, but once I
> >> get back, I'll try to produce a v3 based on this and any further
> >> feedback.
> >
> > Overall it looks good to me. I left a few minor comments.
> >
> > I actually like the split. I found it pretty easy to follow (though
> > squashing as Junio suggested would be fine with me, too).
> 
> I assume that by "the split" you mean patches 7-8, not 1-3.  Anyway,
> I'll squash since you're fine with it and Junio prefers it.

I actually meant both, but as I said, I'm OK with it either way.

-Peff



[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]

  Powered by Linux