From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] gitweb: whitespace cleanup around '=' Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 03:20:57 -0700 Message-ID: <7v64itsd86.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20060622023546.28cb4291.froese@gmx.de> <11509591773212-git-send-email-jnareb@gmail.com> <7vejxhwts4.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vodwlsfek.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jun 22 12:21:06 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FtMJ7-0001fq-Hl for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:21:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751777AbWFVKVA (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jun 2006 06:21:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751780AbWFVKVA (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jun 2006 06:21:00 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao11.cox.net ([68.230.241.28]:52640 "EHLO fed1rmmtao11.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751779AbWFVKU7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jun 2006 06:20:59 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao11.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060622102058.BRWD554.fed1rmmtao11.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 06:20:58 -0400 To: Jakub Narebski In-Reply-To: (Jakub Narebski's message of "Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:37:09 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jakub Narebski writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> I remember discussing things with Timo and was putting it on >> hold since I knew you were also actively futzing on gitweb. > > So when I apply someone else patches should I reply to the post > with patch I have applied with > > Acked-by: Jakub Narebski > > to notify of that fact? Acked-by does not mean you've applied it to your tree, and even if it did, it is unfair to expect me to remember that fact when I review your patch later. In this particular case, a note in the patch to say it depends on such and such that _I_ do not seem to have yet would have been more appropriate. Acked-by would also be helpful when a de-facto owner of the code wants to push acceptance of others' patches, but that is independent from stating what a patch's prerequisites are. Anyhow, I've reviewed Timo's patch (which made sense to me too), and your whitespace fixes and pushed out the result, which hopefully will be propagating to the mirrors soon. Overall, I would say that the clean-up on gitweb so far is reasonably straightforward. I have been running "next" version of gitweb on my private machine and haven't found regression. I'll go to bed now. Thanks for the patches.