Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-28 Thread Junio C Hamano
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: On 04/27/2015 09:05 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: ... Hmm, that may be technically correct but it is grossly misleading to update the existing was obtained on 2014-04-07 to was obtained on 2015-04-27, especially if nothing was actually obtained,

[PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Michael Haggerty
The only changes are to the README files, most notably the list of maintainers and the project URL. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu --- contrib/hooks/multimail/README | 43 +++--- contrib/hooks/multimail/README.Git | 6 +++--- 2 files

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 04/27/2015 09:05 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: [...] Well, the patch does not update git_multimail.py at all. Requoting the part you omitted from my response $ git rev-list -1 master

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Matthieu Moy
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: The only changes are to the README files, most notably the list of maintainers and the project URL. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu --- contrib/hooks/multimail/README | 43 +++---

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Junio C Hamano
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: The only changes are to the README files, most notably the list of maintainers and the project URL. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu --- contrib/hooks/multimail/README | 43 +++---

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Matthieu Moy
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: --- a/contrib/hooks/multimail/README.Git +++ b/contrib/hooks/multimail/README.Git @@ -3,13 +3,13 @@ section of the Git project as a convenience to Git users.

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Junio C Hamano
Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: --- a/contrib/hooks/multimail/README.Git +++ b/contrib/hooks/multimail/README.Git @@ -3,13 +3,13 @@

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Matthieu Moy
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Was that obtained from the upstream project (i.e. you) and match your 1.0.2 tag? Yes. Isn't that what the text above says? Well, the patch does not update

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Matthieu Moy
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: --- a/contrib/hooks/multimail/README.Git +++ b/contrib/hooks/multimail/README.Git @@ -3,13 +3,13 @@ section of the Git project as a convenience to Git users. git-multimail is developed as an independent project at the following website: -

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Junio C Hamano
Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: --- a/contrib/hooks/multimail/README.Git +++ b/contrib/hooks/multimail/README.Git @@ -3,13 +3,13 @@ section of the Git project as a convenience to Git users. git-multimail is developed as an

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Junio C Hamano
Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Was that obtained from the upstream project (i.e. you) and match your 1.0.2 tag? Yes. Isn't that what the

Re: [PATCH] Update git-multimail to version 1.0.2

2015-04-27 Thread Matthieu Moy
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Hmm, that may be technically correct but it is grossly misleading to update the existing was obtained on 2014-04-07 to was obtained on 2015-04-27, especially if nothing was actually obtained, isn't it? That is because you're looking at the patch. The