From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] GIT 1.5.4-rc5 Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:25:31 -0800 Message-ID: <7vprvls9ro.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7vsl13wmas.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vsl0r3nvc.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vk5lutdzq.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080128183851.GB31140@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 29 02:26:22 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 1JJfEy-0000Nj-3n for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 02:26:20 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753818AbYA2BZt (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:25:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753775AbYA2BZt (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:25:49 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:35468 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753470AbYA2BZs (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:25:48 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B8C3221F; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:25:47 -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-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDB99221B; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:25:44 -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: Jeff King writes: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 02:56:41AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Gustaf Hendeby (1): >> send-email, fix breakage in combination with --compose > > I submitted a followup test for this problem, but there was no > response. Can I please get an ACK/NAK/"resend after 1.5.4"? > > For reference, the original message-id was: > > <20080122032353.GB24758@coredump.intra.peff.net> Heh, that's aonly a week ago but already you need to dig almost 500 messages back to get there. That MacOSX thread really killed our human performance. [1/3] is Ok, probably even for 1.5.4. [2/3] The use of "test -e" slightly ticked my compatibility worry (instead use "test -f" or "test -d" when able) but non prehistoric POSIX systems should grok it just fine these days. [3/3] as you said was questionable in its introduction of a flag that used primarily for testing. Since the whole point of [2/3] is to make [3/3] possible, I was inclined to put both on hold.