Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes: > FWIW I picked up your Asciidoc-underline fix, and I also fixed a typo in a > commit message (you may want to pick that up, too, unless you want me to > send a full new iteration, I don't care either way):
Meaning that if you send a full new iteration it would match what we have on 'pu' plus the one-liner below? I think we can do without such a resend, because everybody has seen all there is to see if that is the case. > -- snipsnap -- > 11: bf0a5879361 ! 11: 0c1f5db5d01 range-diff: add tests > @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ > range-diff: add tests > > These are essentially lifted from https://github.com/trast/tbdiff, > with > - light touch-ups to account for the command now being names `git > + light touch-ups to account for the command now being named `git > range-diff`. > > Apart from renaming `tbdiff` to `range-diff`, only one test case > needed I'll need to remember to rebuild es/format-patch-rangediff after amending bf0a587936 with this, but I think I should be able to push out the result in today's round. If any other issue arises, I do not mind taking an update, either, but I think at this point the topic is reaching the point of diminishing returns and should switch to incremental.
