On 2013-02-08 09:45, Peter Rosin wrote: > Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Fine as well. And of curse, if you want to speed thing up and have more >> control on the final result, feel free to shepherd the pending patches to >> the agreed form ;-) -- which if I'm not mistaken is: >> >> - make the series consist of only two patches, one introducing the >> feature (complete with documentation and NEWS additions, plus your >> original test case), and one follow-up patch implementing my >> testsuite enhancement; >> >> - use the '%...%' form, and prefer lower-case for long names (so, >> '%reldir%' a.k.a. '%D%' and '%canon-reldir%' a.k.a. '%C%'). > > Done. I didn't address the canonicalization concern raised by Miles. That > seems like a bigger issue than this patch series. However, If that naming > is changing, it must be done before this series lands in a released > version, or we'll end up with bad comptibility hacks...
Errm, compatibility... Forgot to ask, but should I push out this non-fast-forward to the experimental/preproc branch? That would be 'git checkout experimental/preproc' followed by 'git push -f origin', right? I did rewrite that branch locally assuming the old branch was destined for the bin, but I have never actually done such a rewind of upstream before... Cheers, Peter