Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 07:45:19AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> ...
>> ... It's an interesting idea from git person's point of
>> view (i.e. "would be fun to implement"), but I doubt it would be useful in
>> practice, because:
>>
>> (1) You often
Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Now consider the following patch (modified by hand: it should say
> +foo, but I changed it to +bar).
> ...
> The "index ..." stuff says that there are no changes and it is
> pure rename, but obviously there is a change.
Ah, I see what you mean. But i
Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ..rename and changes ideally go in separate patches.
>
> IIRC this also helps git to track renames (it can easily compare
> hashes instead of guessing).
It does not help much, and it is frowned upon (at least by well educated
users in git circle) beca
Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> 3 files changed, 201 insertions(+), 201 deletions(-)
>>> create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/kernel/dma.c
>>> delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c
>>
>> Passing -M to git format-patch makes it much easier
>
> I always thought that posting "
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 07:45:19AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Now consider the following patch (modified by hand: it should say
> > +foo, but I changed it to +bar).
> > ...
> > The "index ..." stuff says that there are no changes and it is
> >
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 05:53:41PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >>> 3 files changed, 201 insertions(+), 201 deletions(-)
> >>> create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/kernel/dma.c
> >>> delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c
> >>
> >> Passing -
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 04:38:57PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> >> I always thought that posting "-M" patches to the public lists is
> >> discouraged since it is quite difficult to apply them via patch(1).
> >> Also think of non-
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 01:27:17AM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> I always thought that posting "-M" patches to the public lists is
> discouraged since it is quite difficult to apply them via patch(1).
> Also think of non-git users...
Yes, it's a horrible idea.
__
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 04:38:57PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>> I always thought that posting "-M" patches to the public lists is
>> discouraged since it is quite difficult to apply them via patch(1).
>> Also think of non-git users...
>
> I think the substantially enhanced r
Anton Vorontsov wrote:
I always thought that posting "-M" patches to the public lists is
discouraged since it is quite difficult to apply them via patch(1).
Also think of non-git users...
I think the substantially enhanced reviewability trumps non-git-users
who can follow the rename instructio
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 02:18:42PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> Becky Bruce wrote:
>> This is in preparation for the merge of the 32 and 64-bit
>> dma code in arch/powerpc.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Becky Bruce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/Makefile |2 +-
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/d
11 matches
Mail list logo
