Re: [PATCH 2/1] t6300: format missing tagger

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

 



Mischa POSLAWSKY <git@xxxxxxxx> writes:

> Junio wrote:
>> 
>> Mischa POSLAWSKY <git@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>> > Strip an annotated tag of its tagger header and verify it's ignored
>> > correctly in all cases, as fixed in commit e2a81276e8 (ref-filter:
>> > initialize empty name or email fields, 2019-08-19).
>> 
>> I am inclined to squash this test part of the update into the said
>> commit; you'd lose one commit count, but hopefully you do not mind?
>> 
>> My motivation for doing so is that it would allow us to lose the "as
>> fixed in commit X" comment in a log message, which in turn would
>> mean that the code-fix patch can later be rebased safely without
>> having to remember that this one needs to be adjusted ("git rebase"
>> does not do such a rewrite for us, and I personally do not think
>> "git rebase" should do such a rewrite silently, as I cannot quantify
>> the risk of false positives).
>
> Of course.  Might get one commit back if you pick it into maint :)

Actually you won't; I generally do not cherry-pick, even though I
merge down relevant fixes to older maintenance tracks.



[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