From: Junio C Hamano Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 16:39:19 GMT Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2011, #06; Wed, 21) Message-ID: <7v62kkzg3s.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <4E7AFC6C.7080603@elegosoft.com> Michael Schubert writes: > On 09/22/2011 10:37 AM, Carlos Martín Nieto wrote: >> On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 22:04 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> * cn/eradicate-working-copy (2011-09-21) 2 commits >>> - patch-id.c: use strbuf instead of a fixed buffer >>> - Remove 'working copy' from the documentation and C code >> >> It looks like that first commit sneaked in there. Shouldn't that be its >> own topic? > > It's in pu twice: Thansk for noticing. Will remove. > On 09/22/2011 07:04 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> * cn/eradicate-working-copy (2011-09-21) 2 commits >> - patch-id.c: use strbuf instead of a fixed buffer >> - Remove 'working copy' from the documentation and C code > >> * ms/patch-id-with-overlong-line (2011-09-21) 1 commit >> - patch-id.c: use strbuf instead of a fixed buffer > > 64128da and a6c5c60 > > There's also a minor typo in the last sentence of the commit message. > Should I resend? If that is s/user/use/ and nothing else, I can amend locally; otherwise please do. The last part of the "rather dumb heiristic" you talk about is designed to parse "cmd | diff-tree -p --stdin" output. I agree with you that it can safely tightened a bit by checking that 41st byte is the EOL, but it probably is not worth it.