On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:47 PM, Felipe Contreras
wrote:
>
> This is not my first patch that gets rejected, but it's the first one
> that gets rejected by Junio without even looking at it. What is
> anybody supposed to think about that?
My very humble opinion: submit again the series without inc
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
wrote:
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> I think that's the only way forward, since the Git project doesn't
>> wish to be improved.
>>
>> Perhaps it's time for me to create a pseudonym, and when you have to
>> do that to land clearly good patches, y
Felipe Contreras wrote:
> I think that's the only way forward, since the Git project doesn't
> wish to be improved.
>
> Perhaps it's time for me to create a pseudonym, and when you have to
> do that to land clearly good patches, you know something is *REALLY*
> wrong with the project.
I ask only f
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 2:48 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
wrote:
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> git-rebase.rb | 2056
>> +
>> 1 file changed, 2056 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100755 git-rebase.rb
>
> I suggest putting this in contrib/ and cooki
Felipe Contreras wrote:
> git-rebase.rb | 2056
> +
> 1 file changed, 2056 insertions(+)
> create mode 100755 git-rebase.rb
I suggest putting this in contrib/ and cooking it. As usual, my
mantra is: let the patches decide what to do. I'l
Ignore this patch. I was using this to test and improve 'git rebase', and I was
using the lessons learned to improve 'git rebase' shell script.
I was planning it to clean it even more, and simplify it using tricks specific
to Ruby.
But no more.
There's no point in trying to improve 'git rebase'.
6 matches
Mail list logo
