This reverts commit 88e8f908f2b0c56f9ccf8134d8ff9f689af9cc84.
Caused a usability regression for me and foul language for my coworkers.
In particular, I commonly do a git log, with results going through
less, find a potentially interesting commit and execute git show
commit from less. This used
On Mon, 21 April 2014 16:46:22 -0400, Jörn Engel wrote:
This reverts commit 88e8f908f2b0c56f9ccf8134d8ff9f689af9cc84.
Caused a usability regression for me and foul language for my coworkers.
Ping.
Jörn
--
People really ought to be forced to read their code aloud over the phone.
That would
On Fri, 25 April 2014 20:49:52 +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:
Jörn Engel jo...@logfs.org writes:
On Mon, 21 April 2014 16:46:22 -0400, Jörn Engel wrote:
This reverts commit 88e8f908f2b0c56f9ccf8134d8ff9f689af9cc84.
Caused a usability regression for me and foul language for my coworkers
On Mon, 28 April 2014 10:14:05 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes:
- Original Message -
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 09:12:39AM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
The intent of the commit was that is a stupid thing to do, but it's
not so obvious
On Mon, 28 April 2014 16:04:28 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Just the Sign-off is trivial enough that even this brainless
patch-monkey^Wpanda should be able to handle. The part The log
message could be improved is something you may be better equipped
to, though.
Looks good to me. The next
git-quiltimport passed -C1 to git-apply, supposedly to roughly match
the quilt default of --fuzz 2. This is against the spirit of git.
Quoting Linus:
Except unlike the standard patch program, git apply doesn't accept
fuzz by default (which to me is a huge deal - I hate how patch tries
to
On Wed, 24 September 2014 22:09:33 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
This is fine for those who use quilt with --fuzz=0, but how are you
helping those who use quilt without --fuzz=0?
I agree that unconditionally passing -C1 is a bad thing, but
unconditionally passing -C2 is not that better.
7 matches
Mail list logo