From: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 16:08:20 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] All is too much
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:
> 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