> 2016-09-17 18:14 GMT+02:00 Uwe Brauer <[email protected]>:
> Did you take a look to the file you sent?
Usually I do, but since I had so many problems with that format, it
might have escaped that check.
> [...]
> diff --git a/export.patch b/export.patch
> new file mode 100644
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/export.patch
> @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
> [...]
> diff --git a/export2.patch b/export2.patch
> new file mode 100644
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/export2.patch
> @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
> [...]
oops
> It's not a matter of workflow, or git, or hg-git, you committed two
> patches files lying in your workspace. That would be an error even
> with hg ;-)
Ok point taken,[1] but what is with the issue of sending patches with
correspond to my private branches but might include (for you) unwanted
revsets? That is not acceptable? I should collapse them?
> I have to read two or more threads to discover where the latest
> version of patch is and of which patch. If you don't open a new
> thread for each patch or to tell to ignore another patch I can just
> read your latest message with an attachment in order to review a
> specific patch. A thread named "patch with improved commit message"
> doesn't really tell me what the patch is about, and I have to read the
> thread to find whether it's the latest version of the patch for
> style/bidi.el (and discover that it is not). Please stick with one
> thread per patch.
ok
> Bye,
> Mosè
Footnotes:
[1] I see hg facing the same fate as Xemacs, beautiful but not preferred
by most users....
_______________________________________________
auctex-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
