From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] gitweb: unify boolean feature subroutines Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:20:27 -0800 Message-ID: <7vabavp60k.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7vabawu1ao.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <1229408179-7655-1-git-send-email-kraai@ftbfs.org> <7vmyewqypk.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20081216142357.GF4529@ftbfs.org> <20081217081028.GA3640@machine.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Matt Kraai , git@vger.kernel.org, Jakub Narebski To: Petr Baudis X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Dec 17 09:22:04 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LCrfQ-0003h6-2M for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:22:04 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751998AbYLQIUi (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Dec 2008 03:20:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751460AbYLQIUh (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Dec 2008 03:20:37 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:37605 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751548AbYLQIUh (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Dec 2008 03:20:37 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1FA91A75A; Wed, 17 Dec 2008 03:20:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F37D51A758; Wed, 17 Dec 2008 03:20:29 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20081217081028.GA3640@machine.or.cz> (Petr Baudis's message of "Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:10:28 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 947A5E92-CC13-11DD-AA66-F83E113D384A-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Petr Baudis writes: > Hi, > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 06:23:57AM -0800, Matt Kraai wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 01:03:03AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> > But a change to the function signature of feature subroutines is not >> > something I'd like to apply while other series that want to add new >> > features are still cooking. How about doing these two patches as the >> > first thing that goes to 'next' after 1.6.1, and then force other series >> > rebase on top of your change? Alternatively, we could make you wait until >> > other series do settle in 'next' and then apply your change rebased on >> > them, but I think that is probably less optimal. >> >> OK, I'll resubmit the patches on top of 'next' once 1.6.1 is >> released. Thanks for your help, > > is it worth keeping them separate? Just a single patch makes more sense > to me, the interface is much nicer in the latter than in the former. :-) I agree. It should come *first* before other topics that are not in 'master/next' and change the function signature of feature subs of only existing (read: in 'master') ones. This will force gb/gitweb-patch (and anybody else's patch that haven't been submitted, waiting during the -rc period) to be rebased on top of the updated interface, but that's life.