From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luke Diamand Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/4] git-p4: small fixes to branches and labels; tests Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 08:31:35 +0000 Message-ID: <4ED73B67.6080706@diamand.org> References: <1322643817-13051-1-git-send-email-luke@diamand.org> <4ED6809A.9020703@diamand.org> <20111130225813.GA11544@arf.padd.com> <20111130230007.GA11598@arf.padd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Vitor Antunes , git@vger.kernel.org To: Pete Wyckoff X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 01 09:31:36 2011 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 1RW23M-0005Vl-FB for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2011 09:31:36 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751995Ab1LAIbb (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 03:31:31 -0500 Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:56356 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751793Ab1LAIbb (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 03:31:31 -0500 Received: by bkas6 with SMTP id s6so2107257bka.19 for ; Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:31:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.149.22 with SMTP id r22mr6075476bkv.104.1322728289947; Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:31:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from [86.26.7.206] (cpc1-cmbg14-2-0-cust973.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com. [86.26.7.206]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l5sm9748004bkv.9.2011.12.01.00.31.26 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:31:27 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 In-Reply-To: <20111130230007.GA11598@arf.padd.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 30/11/11 23:00, Pete Wyckoff wrote: > P.S. Since you're respinning anyway to change the label code, > can you stick the 'branch with shell char' test from t9801 in > with t9803? It feels more appropriate there than with the branch > tests. And avoids collision with some Vitor code that will get > added eventually. > OK!