From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gustavo Zacarias Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 06:04:03 -0300 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] samba4: bump to version 4.2.0 In-Reply-To: <20150306094008.7baf8c91@free-electrons.com> References: <1425588249-20942-1-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> <1425588249-20942-2-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> <20150305232946.3620697e@free-electrons.com> <54F8F0AC.8030707@zacarias.com.ar> <20150306094008.7baf8c91@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <54F96D83.4010304@zacarias.com.ar> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 03/06/2015 05:40 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > I'm sorry, but I don't buy this. Separating logical changes is > something we ask to all contributors. And the specific chunk I pointed > at does not change at *all* when doing the 4.1 -> 4.2 bump. And even if > some parts of it are changed by the 4.1 -> 4.2 bump, that's OK. Well, i've done it several times in the past, just search for "While at it" and "Also" in the commit logs - in fact it was you who committed them in many cases (and not only mine). Does this mean that i should separate bumps from adding hash files and/or renaming patches? Because the workload and noise committing will go up higher if that's the choice. And how does a package style fix differ from renaming patches that's another style fix? Regards.