If you don't mind, sending git format-patch output (i.e with a log
entry) and removing the space-before-TAB ^^ would be nice.
Will try to do so in the future.
Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Jim Meyering on 12/4/2009 12:52 PM:
>> If you don't mind, sending git format-patch output
>> (i.e with a log entry) and removing the space-before-TAB ^^
>> would be nice.
>
> I went ahead and did the grunt work, this time around. Now pushed.
Thanks!
> commit f921
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Jim Meyering on 12/4/2009 12:52 PM:
>
> Thanks. That looks fine.
> If you don't mind, sending git format-patch output
> (i.e with a log entry) and removing the space-before-TAB ^^
> would be nice.
I went ahead and did the grunt work, th
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> In inetutils we use something like `Version 1.6 (2008-12-27):' in
> NEWS, but news-date-check hardcodes it, and expects something else, `*
> FOO 1.6 (2008-12-27)', would this be acceptable for overriding the
> format?
>
> diff --git a/top/maint.mk b/top/maint.mk
> index c3
Alfred M. Szmidt gnu.org> writes:
>
> In inetutils we use something like `Version 1.6 (2008-12-27):' in
> NEWS, but news-date-check hardcodes it, and expects something else, `*
> FOO 1.6 (2008-12-27)', would this be acceptable for overriding the
> format?
Seems reasonable to me; while it is nic
In inetutils we use something like `Version 1.6 (2008-12-27):' in
NEWS, but news-date-check hardcodes it, and expects something else, `*
FOO 1.6 (2008-12-27)', would this be acceptable for overriding the
format?
diff --git a/top/maint.mk b/top/maint.mk
index c3fab9a..18f63af 100644
--- a/top/maint
