From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/10] allow forcing index v2 and 64-bit offset treshold Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 00:31:24 -0700 Message-ID: <7vlkh0wur7.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vps6dxjvb.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vejmtxekj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Apr 10 11:53:08 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HbAp7-00066f-Et for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:31:29 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752057AbXDJHb0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Apr 2007 03:31:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752064AbXDJHb0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Apr 2007 03:31:26 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao104.cox.net ([68.230.241.42]:39293 "EHLO fed1rmmtao104.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752057AbXDJHbZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Apr 2007 03:31:25 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao104.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.05.02.00 201-2174-114-20060621) with ESMTP id <20070410073123.SYNY1606.fed1rmmtao104.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net>; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 03:31:23 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id lKXQ1W00G1kojtg0000000; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 03:31:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Nicolas Pitre's message of "Mon, 09 Apr 2007 21:03:35 -0400 (EDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nicolas Pitre writes: >> They are _not_ even in 'pu'. I am talking about things that >> have been cooking. > > Remember that positive comments are by default much less verbose than > negative ones. In other words, no news is probably good news. No news means one or more of the following: - Immediately before 1.5.1, people were asked to test 'master' rigorously, and they did, and they are still on 'master'. Nobody noticed breakages in 'next'. - Some people use 'next' but the new features, fixes or enhancements the topics introduce are totally irrelevant to how they use git, so problems are not noticed. This would indicate that some of the topics may not even deserve to be in 'next'. - Most people are generally 'wait and see' and even when warned that some new features cooking in 'next' may change the user experience (even in good ways), they do not try to see if the change may adversely affect them to voice their objection early, to catch the changes they do not like before they graduate to 'master', and then complain. This would indicate that it is futile to have 'next' as a holding area. It would be more effective to push out unproven stuff on 'master' to make sure people complain. None of the above does not sound a good news at all to me. >> >> > ddiff --git a/t/Makefile b/t/Makefile >> >> >> >> ??? > > $ touch t/Makefile > $ git diff This still does not give me doubled d in diff.