On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 12:56:06PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Denton Liu <liu.den...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Hi Junio, > > > > I see that "dl/format-patch-doc-test-cleanup" currently has the comment > > "Expecting a reroll." This should be the reroll that you're expecting ;) > > > > Also, since there haven't been any comments on the topic in a while, I > > propose that it should be ready for inclusion. > > I may be the only person who had issues applying that series from > the list, with mixtures of iso-8859-1 and utf-8 causing troubles, > but if I am not alone, I suspect that the reason why nobody gave a > comment is because the patches did not even apply so there is > nothing to base their comments on.
Which patches weren't applying properly? I managed to apply both the patchset I had locally and a fresh one I downloaded from public-inbox and both applied cleanly. > > I wiggled them and compared the result. The range diff against what > has been queued seems a bit different from what you gave below > (e.g. I see log message got modified on patch #2 and the dropping of > the comma made it harder to read), but the endpoint diff looks not > too bad (IOW, the alloted time for the topic ran out before I > started looking at each individual patches in more depth). Hmmm, I don't think my workflow uses your topic branches properly. I've been range-diffing against the previously submitted patchsets but it seems like you expect a range-diff against the actual topic branch. What should the ideal workflow be? I've been avoiding working directly from the topic branch since that would require me to manually remove your SOB line whenever I generate new patchsets. I guess I could manually remove your SOB line from each patch manually. I dunno. Any ideas? Thanks, Denton
