On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 at 10:32, Eric Sunshine wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:27 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Junio C Hamano writes:
> > So how about doing this on top of 'master' instead? As this leaks
> > *no* information wrt how range-diff machinery should behave from the
> >
Hi Junio,
On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
> >> I had to delay -rc2 to see these last minute tweaks come to some
> >> reasonable place to stop at, and I do not think we want to delay the
> >> final any longer or destablizing it further by piling last minute
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:27 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
> > In any case, I tend to agree with the conclusion in the downthread
> > by Dscho that we should just clearly mark that invocations of the
> > "format-patch --range-diff" command with additional diff options is
> >
On Fri, Nov 30 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
>>> I had to delay -rc2 to see these last minute tweaks come to some
>>> reasonable place to stop at, and I do not think we want to delay the
>>> final any longer or destablizing it further by piling last minute
>>>
Junio C Hamano writes:
>> I had to delay -rc2 to see these last minute tweaks come to some
>> reasonable place to stop at, and I do not think we want to delay the
>> final any longer or destablizing it further by piling last minute
>> undercooked changes on top.
>
> So how about doing this on
Junio C Hamano writes:
> In any case, I tend to agree with the conclusion in the downthread
> by Dscho that we should just clearly mark that invocations of the
> "format-patch --range-diff" command with additional diff options is
> an experimental feature that may not do anything sensible in the
6 matches
Mail list logo