From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shawn O. Pearce" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Builtin-commit: show on which branch a commit was added Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 08:44:25 -0700 Message-ID: <20081001154425.GE21310@spearce.org> References: <48E1C39F.4070906@op5.se> <836C204F-F5AF-4887-99C9-04E70FEEB998@wincent.com> <20080930070938.GA14757@sigill.intra.peff.net> <48E1F87D.2010906@op5.se> <20081001031400.GA24513@coredump.intra.peff.net> <48E3312E.4090601@op5.se> <20081001151011.GA21310@spearce.org> <20081001152546.GB4962@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20081001153637.GC21310@spearce.org> <20081001154205.GD4962@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Andreas Ericsson , Wincent Colaiuta , Pieter de Bie , Junio C Hamano , Git Mailinglist To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Oct 01 17:46:15 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 1Kl3u2-0000u3-2w for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:46:14 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752277AbYJAPo0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:44:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753246AbYJAPo0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:44:26 -0400 Received: from george.spearce.org ([209.20.77.23]:39425 "EHLO george.spearce.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752277AbYJAPo0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:44:26 -0400 Received: by george.spearce.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 340043835F; Wed, 1 Oct 2008 15:44:25 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081001154205.GD4962@coredump.intra.peff.net> 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: Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 08:36:37AM -0700, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > > *sigh* And I just took up the #@*#@!&!*!@ paintbrush myself. > > Dammit. I'm putting it down now. Really. :-) > > Heh. I don't want to stir up trouble or drag you into a discussion you > don't want to be in. But it seems like you are saying "OK, this is > silly, let's just go with what is in next." But I think Andreas raised a > good point about "stuff the user should check should go on the left" > which is not consistent with what is in next. So I just want to confirm > that you either disagree with that, or simply think it is not important > enough to keep the discussion going. I agree with "important stuff on the left". So as much as I'd like to just move on, I guess I'm willing to look at a 3rd patch that moves the branch name onto the left side. -- Shawn.