From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Haberman Subject: Re: What's cooking in git/spearce.git (Oct 2008, #01; Mon, 06) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 15:48:49 -0500 Organization: Exigence Message-ID: <20081006154849.6317f314.stephen@exigencecorp.com> References: <20081006165943.GG8203@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: "Shawn O. Pearce" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Oct 06 22:50:44 2008 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 1Kmx28-0004L9-Ja for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 22:50:25 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754909AbYJFUsx (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2008 16:48:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754823AbYJFUsx (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2008 16:48:53 -0400 Received: from smtp202.sat.emailsrvr.com ([66.216.121.202]:60537 "EHLO smtp202.sat.emailsrvr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754742AbYJFUsw (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2008 16:48:52 -0400 Received: from relay10.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay10.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id DA32A11B35E1; Mon, 6 Oct 2008 16:48:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: by relay10.relay.sat.mlsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: stephen-AT-exigencecorp.com) with ESMTP id 7679611B35BC; Mon, 6 Oct 2008 16:48:50 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20081006165943.GG8203@spearce.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.5.0beta3 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: > * sh/maint-rebase3 (Sun Oct 5 23:26:52 2008 -0500) 1 commit > - rebase--interactive: fix parent rewriting for dropped commits > > A replacement for sh/maint-intrebase. Its in pu because I have > gotten 3 different versions of this patch, two of them posted a > full 4 days after I merged the first version into next. I felt > burned by the patch author for not keeping up with my tree, so I'm > not merging the patch to next. > > At this point its going to sit in pu until Junio comes back. > I think the topic needs a few more days to settle to see if the > patch author is going to submit any more revisions. All fair enough. Sorry for not keeping up with your tree--this was the first I heard my first patch had made it into next, so I kept submitting new ones not really knowing why they weren't generating feedback. My fault for not actively looking into the pu/next thing--I'll know what to do next time. Thanks, Stephen