On 05/30/17 16:35, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>>
>>> Just curious do you know about https://github.com/trast/tbdiff ? If
>>> not it might have a high overlap with
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>
>> Just curious do you know about https://github.com/trast/tbdiff ? If
>> not it might have a high overlap with what you're doing.
>
> Yes, that is a very good
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
> Just curious do you know about https://github.com/trast/tbdiff ? If
> not it might have a high overlap with what you're doing.
Yes, that is a very good suggestion. You'd need to be able to
actually apply the patches but the way I often do a
Laszlo Ersek writes:
> The problem is that I can't really automate the subject munging. The
> concrete subjects in this case were:
>
>> OvmfPkg/QemuFwCfgLib: Implement SEV internal function for SEC phase
>> OvmfPkg/QemuFwCfgLib: Implement SEV internal functions for PEI phase
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> (apologies for the self-followup:)
>
> On 05/30/17 14:28, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>
>> Note that in such an incremental review, I specifically wish to compare
>> patches against each other (i.e., I'd like to see diffs of diffs,
(apologies for the self-followup:)
On 05/30/17 14:28, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> Note that in such an incremental review, I specifically wish to compare
> patches against each other (i.e., I'd like to see diffs of diffs, AKA
> interdiffs), and not the source tree at two, v1<->v2, commits into the
>
On 05/30/17 13:36, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> would it be possible to
>>
>> - increase the FORMAT_PATCH_NAME_MAX macro from 64 to, say, 128?
>>
>> - Or else to introduce a new git-config knob for it?
>>
>>
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> would it be possible to
>
> - increase the FORMAT_PATCH_NAME_MAX macro from 64 to, say, 128?
>
> - Or else to introduce a new git-config knob for it?
>
> I have a small review-helper / interdiff script that matches
On 05/30/17 03:34, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I cannot offhand guess what other places would suffer from such a
> project convention, because I do not work with such a project, but
> you may be able to come up with a list of various places in Git
> where the commit titles are used, and that if there
Laszlo Ersek writes:
> would it be possible to
>
> - increase the FORMAT_PATCH_NAME_MAX macro from 64 to, say, 128?
>
> - Or else to introduce a new git-config knob for it?
It's open source, so both are "possible", but you are interested in
learning if these are acceptable
Hi,
would it be possible to
- increase the FORMAT_PATCH_NAME_MAX macro from 64 to, say, 128?
- Or else to introduce a new git-config knob for it?
I have a small review-helper / interdiff script that matches patches
from adjacent versions of a series against each other, based on subject
line.
11 matches
Mail list logo