Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] filter-branch: add new --blob-filter option.

["Avery Pennarun" <apenwarr@gmail.com>]

On 6/13/08, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>   1. We're supposed to be in rc freeze, so this is not a great time to
>      publish a new feature. ;)

I thought that was what branches were for :)  Anyway, I only rarely
get the chance to work on this stuff lately, so I guess I got excited.

>   2. When bringing back an old patch, please please please give at least
>      a little bit of cover letter context. "Here is what happened last
>      time, here are the reasons this patch was not accepted before, and
>      here is {why I think it that decision was wrong, what I have done
>      to improve the patch, etc}.

Will do next time.

>  IIRC, the situation last time had two issues:
>
>   1. it was a one-off "we're not sure if this is really useful" patch
>
>   2. it was unclear whether paths should be available, and if they were,
>      there was an issue of encountering the same hash at two different
>      paths.
>
>  I assume your answer to '1' is "I have been using this and it is
>  useful". And for '2', it looks like you have extended the cache
>  mechanism to take into account the sha1 and the path, which I think is
>  the right solution (and I am pleased to see it looks like the final test
>  covers the exact situation I was concerned about).

Yes, for #1 it is indeed useful.  I'm using git-svn on Windows with an
IDE that auto-generates files with CRLF in them, and the translation
of that is something roughly like "ARRGH!"  I have to re-fix the
newlines on various different branches at various times and this is
the best way I've found.  (Although I can also imagine using it for
whitespace fixes, etc.)

You are correct about #2.  I believe I've covered all the complaints
that were brought up at the time.

>  (for 1/3):
>  Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
>
>  (for the others (and for 1/3, do I get to ack my own patch?)):
>  Acked-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>

Thanks!

Avery