Philip Oakley <> writes:

>>> The first comment line fortells of patch 6 which can generate this .h
>>> file.
>> The Huh? was about that one, not about reuse.  I do not want to see
>> a build artifact kept in the history without a good reason.
> I'd copied it from which is a common-cmd.h
> dependency and was introduced by
> commit a87cd02ce02e97083eb76eb8b9bfeb2e46800fd7
> Author: Fredrik Kuivinen <>
> Date:   Thu Mar 9 17:24:19 2006 +0100
>     Nicer output from 'git'
>     [jc: with suggestions by Jan-Benedict Glaw]
>     Signed-off-by: Fredrik Kuivinen <>
>     Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <>

Looking at the change again, I do not see us adding a build artifact
(in the case of that patch, common-cmd.h) to our history.  Only the
recipe to generate that file exists there, which is the right thing
to do.

Why do we want common-guides.h which is clearly marked as "A
generated file" at its top in our history?  That was what made me
say "Huh?".
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to