On Tuesday 14 November 2017 08:38 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@xxxxxxxxx> writes:I should have been a little more clear with the numbering, sorry. The correct prefix should have been as follows, * [PATCH v2 1/2] --> [PATCH v2 3/3] * [PATCH v2 1/2] --> [PATCH v2 4/3] Sorry for the inconvenience.I assume that the second one above actually talks about what was sent as "v2 2/2" (not "v2 1/2") being "4/3"?
Yeah. Copy paste error, sorry.
Are these two patches follow-up fixes (replacement of 3/3 plus an extra patch) to jc/branch-name-sanity topic?
Yes, that's right.
Thanks for working on these.
You're welcome. Please do be sure I haven't broken anything in v2. These patches should cleanly apply on 'next', if they don't let me know.
Thanks, Kaartic
