From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Configure test for FREAD_READS_DIRECTORIES Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 09:57:22 -0800 Message-ID: <7vd4q9njel.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <200803041048.53399.michal.rokos@nextsoft.cz> <200803041217.37027.michal.rokos@nextsoft.cz> <7v7igi911y.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <200803041248.54197.michal.rokos@nextsoft.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: GIT To: Michal Rokos X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 05 19:00:05 2008 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 1JWxsc-0004Y9-Da for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:58:14 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752469AbYCER5g (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 12:57:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751733AbYCER5f (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 12:57:35 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:32818 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751275AbYCER5f (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 12:57:35 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 666E41321; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 12:57:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1E1312FE; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 12:57:26 -0500 (EST) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Michal Rokos writes: > Will do... Did that. > > Do you think that there's some reason not-to merge it? Yes, if you meant "apply as-is" by "merge it". No, if you meant "apply after an initial round of sanity checks, even if it is not perfect". I was hoping that with this approach, in a week after you sent out your call-for-help-in-testing, you could send a version for inclusion with a commit log message that says "tested on X (by Foo), Y (by Bar),...", with the patch text that is exactly the same as what people tested. The point is not to make that list of platforms exhaustive, but at least make it a bit more than "works for me". And I think that plan has worked well.