Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] name-rev sanity

Michael J Gruber writes: > Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 29.03.2017 19:43: > ... >> Ah, of course, you are depending on your other topic ;-) >> I'll wiggle these in. >> >> Thanks. > > Yes, sorry, isn't that in next already? I should have meantioned it anyways. No worries.

Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] name-rev sanity

Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 29.03.2017 19:43: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> The first two applies cleanly to the same base as jc/name-rev that >> the first two of these patches are meant to replace, but the third >> one doesn't apply on top. Are you depending on

Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] name-rev sanity

Junio C Hamano writes: > The first two applies cleanly to the same base as jc/name-rev that > the first two of these patches are meant to replace, but the third > one doesn't apply on top. Are you depending on something newer? Ah, of course, you are depending on your other

Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] name-rev sanity

Michael J Gruber writes: > So here is v2 of the name-rev series, the result of our discussions being: > > Junio C Hamano (2): > name-rev: refactor logic to see if a new candidate is a better name > name-rev: favor describing with tags and use committer date to > tiebreak

[PATCH v2 0/3] name-rev sanity

So here is v2 of the name-rev series, the result of our discussions being: Junio C Hamano (2): name-rev: refactor logic to see if a new candidate is a better name name-rev: favor describing with tags and use committer date to tiebreak That second patch is slighty changed as discussed,