Hi Stolee,
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> On 7/18/2018 1:01 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > No, fixing a tool that throws such a harder-to-read patch series in
> > reader's mailbox is *not* something I'd spend my primary focus on,
> > especially when many contributors are perfectly
Hi Peff,
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 02:23:11PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > > Yeah, they're out of order in mutt's threaded display. And the
> > > back-dating means there's a much higher chance of them getting blocked
> > > as spam (e.g., some of
Hi Junio,
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> That won't stop those who want to improve the tool. But I'd wish
> those who want to make Git better spend their time on making Git,
> over making GitGitGadget, better.
And I'd wish that you would not make this task harder by refusing to
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 02:23:11PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > Yeah, they're out of order in mutt's threaded display. And the
> > back-dating means there's a much higher chance of them getting blocked
> > as spam (e.g., some of the dates are from weeks ago).
> >
> > git-send-email uses
On 7/18/2018 1:01 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
No, fixing a tool that throws such a harder-to-read patch series in
reader's mailbox is *not* something I'd spend my primary focus on,
especially when many contributors are perfectly capable of sending
reasonably formatted series without using such a
Duy Nguyen writes:
>> In other words: if you see something that you don't like about
>> GitGitGadget, get your butts off the ground and contribute a fix.
>
> Thank you for the frank words. I will choose to not review any mails
> coming from GitGitGadget.
I wouldn't say I will choose not to, but
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:30 PM Johannes Schindelin
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Derrick Stolee wrote:
>
> > On 7/16/2018 2:44 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 1:27 PM Stefan Beller wrote:
> > > > Another pain point of the Gadget is that CC's in the cover letter
Hi Eric & Peff,
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 2:56 PM Jeff King wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:40:21PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 12:18 PM Jeff King wrote:
> > > > git-send-email uses the current time minus an offset,
Hi,
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> On 7/16/2018 2:44 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 1:27 PM Stefan Beller wrote:
> > > Another pain point of the Gadget is that CC's in the cover letter
> > > do not work as I would imagine. The line
> > >
> > > CC:
Hi Peff,
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:54:38PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
>
> > On 16/07/18 14:00, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > > There are many places in Git that use a commit walk to determine
> > > reachability between commits and/or refs. A
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 2:56 PM Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:40:21PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 12:18 PM Jeff King wrote:
> > > git-send-email uses the current time minus an offset, and then
> > > monotonically increases for each patch:
> >
> > Junio
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:40:21PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 12:18 PM Jeff King wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:54:38PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> > > This is not your problem, but I find these GitGitGadget
> > > submissions somewhat annoying. This series has
On 7/16/2018 2:44 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 1:27 PM Stefan Beller wrote:
Another pain point of the Gadget is that CC's in the cover letter
do not work as I would imagine. The line
CC: sbel...@google.com
did not put that email into the cc field.
gitgitgadget recognizes
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 1:27 PM Stefan Beller wrote:
> Another pain point of the Gadget is that CC's in the cover letter
> do not work as I would imagine. The line
>
> CC: sbel...@google.com
>
> did not put that email into the cc field.
gitgitgadget recognizes case-sensitive "Cc:" only[1].
[1]:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 12:18 PM Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:54:38PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> > This is not your problem, but I find these GitGitGadget
> > submissions somewhat annoying. This series has been spewed
> > all over my in-box in, what I assume, is commit date
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:54:38PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> On 16/07/18 14:00, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > There are many places in Git that use a commit walk to determine
> > reachability between commits and/or refs. A lot of this logic is
> > duplicated.
> [snip] ...
>
>
On 16/07/18 14:00, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote:
> There are many places in Git that use a commit walk to determine
> reachability between commits and/or refs. A lot of this logic is
> duplicated.
[snip] ...
This is not your problem, but I find these GitGitGadget
submissions somewhat
There are many places in Git that use a commit walk to determine
reachability between commits and/or refs. A lot of this logic is
duplicated.
I wanted to achieve the following:
1. Consolidate several different commit walks into one file
2. Reduce duplicate reachability logic
3. Increase
18 matches
Mail list logo
