Re: [PATCH] revisions: refactor init_revisions and setup_revisions.
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 07:36:20PM +0000, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org> writes:
>
> > We could of course have a .def member in the struct rev_info, and use
> > the one passed to setup_revisions then if it's still NULL, but it
> > doesn't really makes sense to me, and I don't really see a problem with
> > saying at init time that you'll default to "HEAD". Though if you really
> > dislike it that much, I squash a patch that does that on top of it.
>
> Well, it was not liking or disliking. Although I thought "default" that
> sets a value to the default after the parser finds that the user did not
> give anything (the approach you described in the above quoted paragraph)
> is a natural implementation, probably more so than what you did, I do not
> have strong preference either way.
Well Okay, I'll let others comment, and will implement this way if
more are in favor of it than against then :)
Show 11 quoted lines
> >> Applying this to 'master' and then merging 'pu' shows that there are a few
> >> topics that are cooking that would conflict with this change. Merging
> >> 'next' seems to go cleanly (I haven't checked the result), so it is not
> >> too bad for me to carrry this at this moment, if we were not this close to
> >> the rc freeze. I dunno.
> >
> > Well I can wait longer, I'd just like to see it merged in a not too
> > far future, because I have to check for new places that would need
> > conversions at each reabase :)
>
> Yeah, that burden can be shifted to me, in other words ;-)
Heh, fair enough. Well, I can wait a bit longer :)
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org
Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org>