On 10/22/2012 11:01 AM, Osier Yang wrote:
> On 2012年10月19日 07:20, Cole Robinson wrote:
>> AUTHORS.in tracks the maintainers, as well as some folks who were
>> previously in AUTHORS but don't have a git commit with proper
>> attribution.
>>
>> Generated output is sorted alphabetically and lacks pret
On 2012年10月19日 07:20, Cole Robinson wrote:
AUTHORS.in tracks the maintainers, as well as some folks who were
previously in AUTHORS but don't have a git commit with proper
attribution.
Generated output is sorted alphabetically and lacks pretty spacing, so
tweak AUTHORS.in to follow the same forma
On 10/19/2012 12:14 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 10/18/2012 09:33 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 10/18/2012 05:20 PM, Cole Robinson wrote:
>>> AUTHORS.in tracks the maintainers, as well as some folks who were
>>> previously in AUTHORS but don't have a git commit with proper
>>> attribution.
>>>
>>> Gene
On 10/18/2012 09:33 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 10/18/2012 05:20 PM, Cole Robinson wrote:
>> AUTHORS.in tracks the maintainers, as well as some folks who were
>> previously in AUTHORS but don't have a git commit with proper
>> attribution.
>>
>> Generated output is sorted alphabetically and lacks pr
On 10/18/2012 05:20 PM, Cole Robinson wrote:
> AUTHORS.in tracks the maintainers, as well as some folks who were
> previously in AUTHORS but don't have a git commit with proper
> attribution.
>
> Generated output is sorted alphabetically and lacks pretty spacing, so
> tweak AUTHORS.in to follow th
AUTHORS.in tracks the maintainers, as well as some folks who were
previously in AUTHORS but don't have a git commit with proper
attribution.
Generated output is sorted alphabetically and lacks pretty spacing, so
tweak AUTHORS.in to follow the same format.
Additionally, drop the syntax-check rule
