From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH1/2] Libify blame Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:20:29 -0700 Message-ID: <7v3adbmjwy.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <49BE5343.60900@gmail.com> <7vocvzmlqf.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <1b29507a0903172259t348cb4d5n70f5b3003b1eeb00@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx To: pi.songs@gmail.com X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 18 07:23:50 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 1LjpBt-0000Ht-BO for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 07:23:49 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754314AbZCRGUi (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:20:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753335AbZCRGUi (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:20:38 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:40510 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752071AbZCRGUh (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:20:37 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0425721A; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:20:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 26BEE7219; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:20:31 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <1b29507a0903172259t348cb4d5n70f5b3003b1eeb00@mail.gmail.com> (pi song's message of "Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:59:07 +1100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E3E591FA-1384-11DE-812F-C5D912508E2D-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: pi song writes: > Don't you think we should rather split up into smaller files before > start reorganizing things? Yes, but splitting it wrong is, eh, wrong ;-)