> On Feb 22, 2018, at 12:02 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> I saw somewhere "Apple-Mail" and a phrase "repaste". So perhaps
> copy on the client is involved in the whitespace damage (of
> course the original could be broken, but I somehow doubt it).
Jeff King writes:
> This indentation is funny. But I suspect it is because your whole patch
> seems to have been whitespace-damaged (see the section on gmail in
> "git help git-format-patch").
I saw somewhere "Apple-Mail" and a phrase "repaste". So perhaps
copy on the client is
On 02/21, Dorian Taylor wrote:
>
> > On Feb 21, 2018, at 9:37 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for writing it.
> >
> > Do you mind if we forge your sign-off? (See Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > item '(5) Certify your work' for details about what this means.)
> On Feb 22, 2018, at 2:08 AM, Jeff King wrote:
>
>
> This indentation is funny. But I suspect it is because your whole patch
> seems to have been whitespace-damaged (see the section on gmail in
> "git help git-format-patch").
That is, bit-for-bit, what came out of that
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:23:52PM -0800, Dorian Taylor wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/technical/http-protocol.txt
> b/Documentation/technical/http-protocol.txt
> index a0e45f2889e6e..19d73f7efb338 100644
> --- a/Documentation/technical/http-protocol.txt
> +++
> On Feb 21, 2018, at 9:37 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> Thanks for writing it.
>
> Do you mind if we forge your sign-off? (See Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> item '(5) Certify your work' for details about what this means.)
Sure, or I can just re-paste:
(+cc: bmwill@, who is working on protocol v2)
Hi,
Dorian Taylor wrote:
> On Feb 21, 2018, at 2:15 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>> Thanks, I agree the document is buggy. Do you want to submit a patch?
>
> Will this do?
Thanks for writing it.
Do you mind if we forge your sign-off? (See
> On Feb 21, 2018, at 2:15 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>
> Thanks, I agree the document is buggy. Do you want to submit a patch?
Will this do?
Note I am not sure what the story is behind that `version 1` element, whether
it's supposed to go before or after the null packet or if there
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 10:29:35AM -0800, Dorian Taylor wrote:
> I didn’t get an insight until I ran with GIT_TRACE_PACKET=true on a
> known-good remote (i.e. GitHub), that the null packet-line `` has to
> follow the service line. This is not reflected in the example here:
>
>
9 matches
Mail list logo