From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add submodule-support to git archive Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 00:25:08 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: <1232844726-14902-1-git-send-email-hjemli@gmail.com> <20090125135340.6117@nanako3.lavabit.com> <8c5c35580901250018x6827291cj36e6bcb10afa9b27@mail.gmail.com> <7veiyrdszf.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <8c5c35580901251512q5058dde3rdfae81979c46c36a@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Junio C Hamano , Nanako Shiraishi , git@vger.kernel.org To: Lars Hjemli X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jan 26 00:26:11 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 1LREMc-00004s-M0 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 00:26:03 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750978AbZAYXYk (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:24:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750971AbZAYXYk (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:24:40 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:47284 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750947AbZAYXYj (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:24:39 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 25 Jan 2009 23:24:37 -0000 Received: from pD9EB3E0E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO noname) [217.235.62.14] by mail.gmx.net (mp068) with SMTP; 26 Jan 2009 00:24:37 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19zbB9c2BdzXMNVLO7Ayq3XNahI/3oknDJ5b//JUI pUADMb4AvLKWvp X-X-Sender: gene099@racer In-Reply-To: <8c5c35580901251512q5058dde3rdfae81979c46c36a@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.64 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Lars Hjemli wrote: > On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 21:35, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Could we switch to incremental refinements once a series hits next, > > pretty please? > > The problem in this particular case is that the design has changed so > much since the first iteration that we're not really talking about > incremental refinements but rather a different approach to the same > problem. > > If you want me to build on top of the series in next anyways, would it > be acceptable if the first patch on top of ee306d2d59 reverts the > previous attempt? I think the rest of the series will be easier to > review that way. I'd appreciate that. Since 'next' will be rewound eventually, that first iteration and the revert will disappear at some stage. Ciao, Dscho