On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:05:42PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:39:23AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Are these three patches the same as what has been queued on
mt/patch-id-stable topic and cooking in 'next' for a few
Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:05:42PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
After comparing the patches 4-6 and the one that has been in 'next'
for a few weeks, I tried to like the new one, but I couldn't.
I'm fine with the one in next too.
I was under the
Patch id changes if users
1. reorder file diffs that make up a patch
or
2. split a patch up to multiple diffs that touch the same path
(keeping hunks within a single diff ordered to make patch valid).
As the result is functionally equivalent, a different patch id is
surprising to many users.
In
Are these three patches the same as what has been queued on
mt/patch-id-stable topic and cooking in 'next' for a few weeks?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:39:23AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Are these three patches the same as what has been queued on
mt/patch-id-stable topic and cooking in 'next' for a few weeks?
Not exactly - at your request I implemented git config
options to control patch id behaviour.
Documentation
Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:39:23AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Are these three patches the same as what has been queued on
mt/patch-id-stable topic and cooking in 'next' for a few weeks?
Not exactly - at your request I implemented git config
6 matches
Mail list logo
