Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Which seems to have been followed-up by > https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.361.git.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/; > I.e. you sent a git-gui change to this ML. > > Or do you mean that it should have been sent to this ML, Pratyush should > have pulled it, and Junio would have pulled upstream after that? The destination of the e-mailed patch was fine. I think what Dscho is saying is that the patch for git-gui should have been split into its own patch that is rooted at that project, i.e. the "diff --git" line shouldn't have had "a/git-gui/Makefile" but just "a/Makefile" if the patch were to modify the top-level Makefile of that project. Then the git-gui maintainer picks up the patch (after possible review iterations), applies to his or her tree, and tells me to pull the result with "-Xsubtree=git-gui" option. At least that was how the world worked, when we had an active git-gui maintainer. The same story goes for gitk part of the tree. These days, neither subtree is very active and I am not sure how much value we are getting out of this "clean separation". Thanks.
