From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shawn O. Pearce" Subject: Re: [PATCH] parse-opt: migrate fmt-merge-msg. Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:46:23 -0700 Message-ID: <20080930224623.GQ21310@spearce.org> References: <1222595139-32087-1-git-send-email-madcoder@debian.org> <1222595139-32087-2-git-send-email-madcoder@debian.org> <20080929163523.GC18340@spearce.org> <20080930084019.GB11453@artemis.corp> <20080930191014.GH21310@spearce.org> <20080930211643.GA16879@artemis.corp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com To: Pierre Habouzit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Oct 01 00:47:35 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Kko0E-0003Gd-WC for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 01 Oct 2008 00:47:35 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753409AbYI3WqY (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:46:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753299AbYI3WqY (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:46:24 -0400 Received: from george.spearce.org ([209.20.77.23]:40877 "EHLO george.spearce.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752965AbYI3WqY (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:46:24 -0400 Received: by george.spearce.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 5FA7138360; Tue, 30 Sep 2008 22:46:23 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080930211643.GA16879@artemis.corp> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Pierre Habouzit wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 07:10:14PM +0000, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 04:35:23PM +0000, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > > > Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > > > Also fix an inefficient printf("%s", ...) where we can use write_in_full. > > > > I'd appreciate an updated series if you can send it. am -3 isn't > > "easily" applying it. > > Okay, I will then, but FWIW it means that when you'll try to merge this > in next it'll conflict at that time, so I'm not sure there's a huge win > for you at that point. It may actually be a good idea to rebase this against master. Reading Junio's notes for sg/merge-options (the branch this conflict is coming out of) it sounds like we'd want to revert that anyway. Its been around since April and Junio was talking about it needing to be in a 1.7.0 release. Its not going to graduate anytime soon. IOW I'm quite tempted to revert sg/merge-options and cancel the branch out of next. -- Shawn.