Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin writes:
>> I thought about that.
>> Is there a use case for cover after the last patch works and
>> removes the need to touch am_next (can be done out of the loop in
>> am_run).
>
> Do you have an opinion on that ? It has quite a big impact on how things are
> done !
Le 14/11/2017 à 10:17, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin a écrit :
>
> Le 14/11/2017 à 07:00, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
>> Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin writes:
>>
>> By the way, don't we want to sanity check state->last (which we
>> learn by running "git mailsplit" that splits the incoming mbox into
>> pi
Le 14/11/2017 à 07:00, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
> Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin writes:
>
>> if (!git_config_get_bool("commit.gpgsign", &gpgsign))
>> state->sign_commit = gpgsign ? "" : NULL;
>> +
>> }
> Please give at least a cursory proof-reading before sending things
> out.
>
Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin writes:
> if (!git_config_get_bool("commit.gpgsign", &gpgsign))
> state->sign_commit = gpgsign ? "" : NULL;
> +
> }
Please give at least a cursory proof-reading before sending things
out.
> @@ -1106,14 +1131,6 @@ static void am_next(struct am_stat
Issue with empty patch detection
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin
---
builtin/am.c | 143 ---
1 file changed, 126 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin/am.c b/builtin/am.c
index 92c485350..702cbf8e0 100644
--- a/buil
5 matches
Mail list logo
