On Tuesday 14 November 2017 08:38 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> writes:

I should have been a little more clear with the numbering, sorry. The
correct prefix should have been as follows,

    * [PATCH v2 1/2] --> [PATCH v2 3/3]

    * [PATCH v2 1/2] --> [PATCH v2 4/3]

Sorry for the inconvenience.

I assume that the second one above actually talks about what was
sent as "v2 2/2" (not "v2 1/2") being "4/3"?


Yeah. Copy paste error, sorry.


Are these two patches follow-up fixes (replacement of 3/3 plus an
extra patch) to jc/branch-name-sanity topic?


Yes, that's right.


Thanks for working on these.


You're welcome. Please do be sure I haven't broken anything in v2. These patches should cleanly apply on 'next', if they don't let me know.


Thanks,
Kaartic

Reply via email to