Junio - On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 10:27:26 AM MST Junio C Hamano wrote: > > t7500-commit.sh > > t7501-commit.sh > > t7502-commit.sh > > t7509-commit.sh > > These seem to have organically grown and it is very likely that ones > later introduced were added more from laziness. How does the project prefer to handle patches that conflict. Renaming t7501- commit.sh will conflict with a patch set that I submitted over the weekend [1]. Should I treat them as totally separate? On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 3:36:11 PM MST Junio C Hamano wrote: > * sl/commit-dry-run-with-short-output-fix (2018-07-30) 4 commits > . commit: fix exit code when doing a dry run > . wt-status: teach wt_status_collect about merges in progress > . wt-status: rename commitable to committable > . t7501: add coverage for flags which imply dry runs I noted that this patch set is similar to the one that I just submitted. Are you thinking of not using mine (in which case I will drop it)? If not I will add a patch to fix the committable spelling[2] and re-roll. [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/20180901235256.4260-1-ischis2@xxxxxxx/
