Hi Junio, On Mon, 30 Jul 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes: > > > FWIW I picked up your Asciidoc-underline fix, and I also fixed a typo in a > > commit message (you may want to pick that up, too, unless you want me to > > send a full new iteration, I don't care either way): > > Meaning that if you send a full new iteration it would match what we > have on 'pu' plus the one-liner below? I think we can do without > such a resend, because everybody has seen all there is to see if > that is the case. > > > -- snipsnap -- > > 11: bf0a5879361 ! 11: 0c1f5db5d01 range-diff: add tests > > @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ > > range-diff: add tests > > > > These are essentially lifted from https://github.com/trast/tbdiff, > > with > > - light touch-ups to account for the command now being names `git > > + light touch-ups to account for the command now being named `git > > range-diff`. > > > > Apart from renaming `tbdiff` to `range-diff`, only one test case > > needed > > I'll need to remember to rebuild es/format-patch-rangediff after > amending bf0a587936 with this, but I think I should be able to push > out the result in today's round. > > If any other issue arises, I do not mind taking an update, either, > but I think at this point the topic is reaching the point of > diminishing returns and should switch to incremental. Thomas had a couple of good suggestions, still, and I am considering to try to find time to simply disable the whitespace warnings altogether in range-diff. Ciao, Dscho
