From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C160D1F859 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 17:39:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932421AbcHIRjG (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Aug 2016 13:39:06 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:51745 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932222AbcHIRjG (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Aug 2016 13:39:06 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F213465F; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 13:39:04 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=XozsxyFw3P6hcynuh1VT4FlXG08=; b=ZK3Vxc atlOTfQuuKYjpPUT1YQA//kypki0jxIGG5Gsv8fZ/k1iOV8O0xmgdJZp7j1KZQwO X+XudmP07E30zdaESL6T8/XtgKgGMQ3TNnEDwFFTepndOmCWJW3EGKdIV6ZDK0T/ 78roH0cbIdaLJqoQozWgM6ZN/vc2OYp92eALU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=DNcoONRwv5KpKC2OJvvmmyHkQ7U7r6cK HkZRaEJF8aYRACC3lWSS4Ex4C26KF9ZvoHXqzIHbRIDFbkrEZaeGxaexJz7+QI6Q tW+pUZrhyMryLLjktpe2sH6m30p/0uI7MJe+e7pCi5/J9D9cgsEdt9j1ydpd+Jat lLfASONOyyM= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2B903465E; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 13:39:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 775483465D; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 13:39:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Stefan Beller Cc: Eric Sunshine , Git List , Jens Lehmann , "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/9] t7408: modernize style References: <20160809040811.21408-1-sbeller@google.com> <20160809040811.21408-2-sbeller@google.com> Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 10:39:00 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Beller's message of "Tue, 9 Aug 2016 10:30:47 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 29EEAC1A-5E58-11E6-A559-EE617A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Stefan Beller writes: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Junio C Hamano writes: >> >>> Eric Sunshine writes: >>> > > I originally thought that it may be easier to have 2 patches. > This first one is very gentle and "obviously correct" as it only changes > formatting and drops the directory changes. > > The second patch goes for renaming ans subtle style issues, > combining some tests, so it is more likely to break. > > After this review, I consider using just one patch and do it all > at once to not confuse the readers as otherwise I should reword > the commit message with the rationale of doing it in two patches. FWIW, I would think your split between 1/ and 2/ were very sensible, and have a slight preference for keeping them separate. If you already have squashed, I do not insist you to split it again; it is not a big deal either way.