From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Barkalow Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Add for_each_remote() function, and extend remote_find_tracking() Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:09:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <7vhcof2rur.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vzm2620wp.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <46919692.5020708@gnu.org> <7vhcoexqeh.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4pkduw2f.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vzm25tex6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vy7hosv7v.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vtzscqf2r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Paolo Bonzini , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 10 23:09:50 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I8Mxy-0006L2-CS for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:09:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759493AbXGJVJq (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:09:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759705AbXGJVJq (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:09:46 -0400 Received: from iabervon.org ([66.92.72.58]:4635 "EHLO iabervon.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758422AbXGJVJq (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:09:46 -0400 Received: (qmail 2641 invoked by uid 1000); 10 Jul 2007 21:09:45 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Jul 2007 21:09:45 -0000 In-Reply-To: <7vtzscqf2r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > The function for_each_remote() does exactly what the name suggests. > > > > The function remote_find_tracking() was extended to be able to search > > remote refs for a given local ref. You have to set the parameter > > "reverse" to true for that behavior. > > The updated patch does not use "reverse" but the old description > is still there. > > Daniel, one thing I fear about your "I want to store the message > in the object store so that I can reuse even after I re-polish > the series" desire on the cover letter topic is this kind of > gotcha, and that is why I suggested "*** BLURB GOES HERE ***". > Both the summary (diffstat and shortlog) part and the > description part should be kept fresh in the updated 0/N; while > we can automate the summary part whenever we re-generate 0/N, > you cannot automate the description part. It seems to me that commit messages are much more likely to mention the sorts of details that are affected by review than cover letters are. Furthermore, if the message is coming out of a tag on the head of the series, whatever is used to put the tag onto the new head of the series would present the buffer for editting again, just like commit --amend does. So the user would be just as likely to think to update a series header as a commit message, and less likely to need to. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank*