Bernt Hansen <bernt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > its clear in both the email and in the commit log that the change is > > a git-gui change. Remember, git-gui's logs show up in the core Git > > logs (as its merged with -s subtree) so having that git-gui: prefix > > does help people to localize the change within the overall suite. > > This is my first attempt at creating a patch for git (even if it is > mostly trivial in this case) and I wasn't aware of the git-gui.gitk repo > and conventions regarding the commit message. I just tried to follow > what was in Documentation/SubmittingPatches. I'll try to do better next > time :) Its a good first attempt. I also just sent a patch to Junio to try and make this "special case" of directing git-gui changes to me more clear for new folk. > Forcing a LF on the end of the commit message feels wrong to me too. I think Junio just convinced me otherwise. We probably should change git-gui to always end the last line of the message with an LF. To be honest I'm not really sure why it doesn't do that now. ;-) > The patch as it stands should probably not be applied. But I think that is now only because the commit message could be clarified to state that its for git-gui (e.g. start with "git-gui:") and probably shouldn't be so specific to rebase -i's breakage but instead talk about how its good to be strict in what you create, and lenient in what you accept, and since we're creating here, we should always try to Do The Right Thing(tm). If you respin the patch with a more descriptive message I'll put it into 0.9.1. -- Shawn. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
