From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2010, #01; Mon, 04) Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:49:14 +0100 Message-ID: <4B43A5CA.7090104@kdbg.org> References: <7vljgei7rs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <4B421766.4040506@kdbg.org> <7vhbr1bagk.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 05 22:12:46 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NSGhp-0002d2-4z for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:12:45 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754857Ab0AEVMl (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:12:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754700Ab0AEVMl (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:12:41 -0500 Received: from bsmtp5.bon.at ([195.3.86.187]:59258 "EHLO lbmfmo03.bon.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752711Ab0AEVMk (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:12:40 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 1397 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:12:40 EST Received: from bsmtp.bon.at (unknown [172.18.12.54]) by lbmfmo03.bon.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7227CCEC46 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:50:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from [77.116.28.239] (77.116.28.239.wireless.dyn.drei.com [77.116.28.239]) by bsmtp.bon.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D5A2A7EB4; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:49:18 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) In-Reply-To: <7vhbr1bagk.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano schrieb: > While you are technically correct that the change you made in t4030 is not > justified by the commit log message in the sense that the "hexdump" script > will go through run_command() interface and is not subject to the special > rules filter writers need to keep in mind, the patch text itself is a good > change, isn't it? The patch text is good, but since it will not make a difference (and there are a ton of other places that use /bin/sh successfully), the change is not warrented at this time, IMO. > As "run-command: convert simple callsites to use_shell" is the one that > changes the filter_buffer(), do you want to have t0021 patch before that > one, to prepare the test for the coming change? Well, the test will break on Windows only after "run-command: optimize out useless shell calls", and I wrote the commit message accordingly. If you move it before that one (and if you are picky) the commit message should be changed as well. -- Hannes