From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kirill Smelkov Subject: Re: John (zzz) Doe (Comment) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:30:48 +0300 Organization: St.Petersburg State University Message-ID: <20090121203048.GB5400@roro3.zxlink> References: <7vmydu3yy7.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090115194926.GA6899@roro3.zxlink> <7vd4eos3rp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090116080807.GA10792@landau.phys.spbu.ru> <7vd4enacf2.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090118145429.GA27522@roro3.zxlink> <7vmydoxxcr.fsf_-_@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090120191446.GB5721@roro3.zxlink> <7vzlhlic7d.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jan 21 21:31:45 2009 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 1LPjjf-0000al-2O for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:31:39 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753944AbZAUU3a (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:29:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752331AbZAUU3a (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:29:30 -0500 Received: from landau.phys.spbu.ru ([195.19.235.38]:3374 "EHLO landau.phys.spbu.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752395AbZAUU33 (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:29:29 -0500 Received: by landau.phys.spbu.ru (Postfix, from userid 509) id 977C917B66E; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:29:27 +0300 (MSK) Received: from kirr by landau.phys.spbu.ru with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LPjiq-00024v-1P; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:30:48 +0300 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vzlhlic7d.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 07:12:54PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Kirill Smelkov writes: > > Is it ok? > > I think the patch text looks good, but what you have as the proposed > commit log message does not look anything like log message we usually use. > > - If you agree with my comment that "should NOT be included" from the RFC > you quoted is irrelevant, then I do not think you would even want to > have anything before "On the other hand,...". > > - If you disagree, then why are you bending the patch text to match what > I say? ;-) I agree, really :) It's only me usually tired in the end of the day, like today too. I'll try to have a rest and will reply with updated patch. Thanks, Kirill