Yes I am +1/2 on *not* using --no-prefix since it's less typing. If no one responds and disagrees, let's stop using --no-prefix.
Brock On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <[email protected]> wrote: > I have similar opinion that I do not much care. However I tent to not use > --no-prefix as it means less typing for me. But I'm good with both options. > > Jarcec > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 05:34:20PM -0700, Mike Percy wrote: >> I don't have a strong preference, as long as it works with Review Board I'm >> fine with doing whatever. >> >> Regards >> Mike >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Brock Noland <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Traditionally as a project we have generated patches with --no-prefix. >> > As Mike said on ReviewBoard: >> > >> > "--no-prefix used to be required to generate a patch that was >> > compatible with both Subversion and Git, but since we have switched >> > over to using only Git it should not be necessary anymore. Still, I've >> > regenerated the patch with --no-prefix." >> > >> > As a project should we switch over to the default git prefix? I am >> > fine with the current scenario or using a prefix, I'd just like us to >> > be consistent. >> > >> > Brock >> > -- Apache MRUnit - Unit testing MapReduce - http://incubator.apache.org/mrunit/
