From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] t800?-blame.sh: retitle uniquely Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:58:46 -0500 Message-ID: <20101213195846.GA18355@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <4D05F1EA.9000403@viscovery.net> <52f777e518583955f78b71e96b3c8ff53d25b608.1292256498.git.git@drmicha.warpmail.net> <20101213170734.GA24736@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vfwu1zc0x.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Michael J Gruber , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Sixt To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Dec 13 20:58:56 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSEXw-0006ms-51 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 20:58:56 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754810Ab0LMT6u (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:58:50 -0500 Received: from xen6.gtisc.gatech.edu ([143.215.130.70]:46272 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754687Ab0LMT6u (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:58:50 -0500 Received: (qmail 10921 invoked by uid 111); 13 Dec 2010 19:58:49 -0000 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (99.108.226.0) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 19:58:49 +0000 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:58:46 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vfwu1zc0x.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 11:51:58AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > t7500-commit.sh > > t7501-commit.sh > > t7502-commit.sh > > t7509-commit.sh > > t7509 seems to be about the authorship, so it is easy to rename it to > t7509-commit-authorship or something, but unfortunately I do not see > unifying theme in any of t750[012]. They test random things and there > seem to be overlaps. I read through them and came to the same conclusion. > Perhaps somebody wants to consolidate these three into one? I think this falls into my "would be nice if it had been written cleaner in the first place, but is not worth the time to clean up" category. But if somebody else is willing to work on it, I have no objection. :) -Peff