On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 19:42:30 -0800, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Please drop the above the next time.
Oops. Yes, I missed that. > FWIW, I only said "_at least_ you need consent from them", and it was not > meant to be an exhaustive list. "blame -C -C -C" may tell you more. Fair enough. > You are the party that wants this relicensing, not me. Please do not > burden me with excessive legwork for you, but help me a bit more > proactively to make this happen. I hope you see I haven't asked you to do any additional legwork. A suggestion was made to construct a patch, which I did. You always have the option of accepting or rejecting the patch as you see fit. > Oh, I never said "do not use message ID". I said "message ID alone is not > good enough for most people". Users of gmane and notmuch who know the > tool they use would benefit from having message ID, _too_, but even if you > were a user of notmuch, unless you have subscribed to the list and have > your own archive, you wouldn't be able to say "show id:frotz". Certainly. My assumption was that in a commit message for git, readers would naturally assume that a message ID with no additional specification could be found in the archives of the standard git mailing list, (which is the case here). Otherwise, I would have qualified the message ID more specifically. -Carl
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list email@example.com http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch