Re: [PATCH 1/2] hard-code the empty tree object

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

 



On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 09:42:26AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> > Should I re-send, or do you want to just markup the existing patches?
> 
> Shouldn't the previous one that uses the hardcoded empty tree
> object name good enough that is already on 'pu'?

Yes, they are fine (I hadn't looked at them that carefully before, but
it looks like you cleaned up the ordering sensibly already).

The last paragraph in the commit message of the add--interactive patch
should be removed (the implementation is no longer "hack-ish").

-Peff
-
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

[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