On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 10:40:04AM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
> >> After a good deal of thinking, here's how i think CG should be
> >> structured.
> > More thinking and discussion than we had the previous 4 times we
> > reorganized the CG?
> from a week ago.
Chapters 1 and 2 are solid (other than the
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 09:55:39AM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
> I'm somewhat confused about the organization of the CG chapters
> about Git and patch review.
>
> First:
> 3.2.2 Git for the impatient and
> 3.3 Basic Git procedures
>
> share some information, and this in a somewhat confusing way.
> Is
Urs Liska wrote Sunday, December 22, 2013 9:40 AM
> Am 22.12.2013 10:29, schrieb Trevor Daniels:
>>
>> The CG has never been properly revised and reorganised, with
>> many sections added without considering the effect on others.
>
> But I'm still more confused because this contradicts
>
> >> Af
Am 22.12.2013 10:29, schrieb Trevor Daniels:
Urs, you wrote Sunday, December 22, 2013 8:55 AM
Subject: CG organization (Git)
I'm somewhat confused about the organization of the CG chapters about
Git and patch review.
The CG has never been properly revised and reorganised, with
Urs, you wrote Sunday, December 22, 2013 8:55 AM
Subject: CG organization (Git)
> I'm somewhat confused about the organization of the CG chapters about
> Git and patch review.
The CG has never been properly revised and reorganised, with
many sections added without considering th
I'm somewhat confused about the organization of the CG chapters about
Git and patch review.
First:
3.2.2 Git for the impatient and
3.3 Basic Git procedures
share some information, and this in a somewhat confusing way.
Is there a _short_ explanation what these two chapters are intended for?
Sec
