Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] git-multimail: a replacement for post-receive-email

2013-04-21 Thread Junio C Hamano
Michael Haggerty writes: > * When I think a batch of patches is ready, I merge them to my master > and publish my master somewhere. (Or is it better I publish the feature > branch and leave it to you to merge directly to your master?) I think I missed this part, but in the case of git-svn, what

Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] git-multimail: a replacement for post-receive-email

2013-04-21 Thread Junio C Hamano
Michael Haggerty writes: > That seems very workable. That is pretty much it. > What is your preference regarding the history to date? The only thing I deeply care about is that initial and subsequent "git pull" I'll do from you [*1*] will pull in commits that touch only the "multimail" part in

Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] git-multimail: a replacement for post-receive-email

2013-04-21 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 04/21/2013 08:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jonathan Nieder writes: > >> My personal preference is that patches come on the git list, are >> reviewed here, and then go to your fork of the Git project that Junio >> can periodically pull from at your request (like git-svn). But of >> course th

Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] git-multimail: a replacement for post-receive-email

2013-04-21 Thread Junio C Hamano
Jonathan Nieder writes: > My personal preference is that patches come on the git list, are > reviewed here, and then go to your fork of the Git project that Junio > can periodically pull from at your request (like git-svn). But of > course this is up to you, too. And also me ;-) Yes, I very mu

Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] git-multimail: a replacement for post-receive-email

2013-04-21 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Hi, Michael Haggerty wrote: > This series consists of a single patch that adds a directory > contrib/hooks/git-multimail/ containing five files, described in the > patch's commit message. Yay! I look forward to seeing it. [...] > The first of these commits