Re: [PATCH 0/4] All is too much
- From
Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
- Date
- May 14, 2010, 16:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4BED7574.4070503@drmicha.warpmail.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20100514060612.GA19652@coredump.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King venit, vidit, dixit 14.05.2010 08:06:
Show 12 quoted lines
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 04:24:34PM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote: > >> This series introduces --lrbranches and --locals as abbreviations >> for "HEAD --branches --remotes" (local and remote branches) resp. >> "HEAD --branches --tags" (local refs). > > Thanks. --lrbranches is still a little ugly to me, but it does address > my concern with --heads, and I don't have a better suggestion. > > Patch 4/4 itself looks OK. Did you test each part of the series > independently, though? It looks like 3/4 tests --lrbranches, which isn't > introduced until 4/4.
Sheesh. I did test them individually, of course. That is, before reordering with rebase -i and "fixup!"ing the last one. I probably squashed them in the wrong order :(
I always get confused by the ordering in the action script, which is just the reverse of git log --oneline.
I'm sorry I didn't catch this myself, I'll rerebase-eee asap.
Michael