Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add submodule-support to git archive

From: Lars Hjemli <hjemli@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 25, 2009, 23:12 UTC
Message-ID: <8c5c35580901251512q5058dde3rdfae81979c46c36a@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7veiyrdszf.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 21:35, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Lars Hjemli <hjemli@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 05:53, Nanako Shiraishi <nanako3@lavabit.com> wrote:
>>> What would I do to try this new series? Fork a branch from Junio's master branch,
>>> apply your new patches, and merge the result to Junio's next?
>>
>> Yes, that sounds right (btw: the series is buildt on top of 5dc1308562
>> (Merge branch 'js/patience-diff') and can be pulled from
>> git://hjemli.net/pub/git/git lh/traverse-gitlinks).
>>
>> But before merging with 'next', you'll need to `git revert -m 1 bdf31cbc00`.
>
> Yuck, that is too much to ask for regular testers and users.

Sorry about that.

> Could we switch to incremental refinements once a series hits next, pretty
> please?

The problem in this particular case is that the design has changed so much since the first iteration that we're not really talking about incremental refinements but rather a different approach to the same problem.

If you want me to build on top of the series in next anyways, would it be acceptable if the first patch on top of ee306d2d59 reverts the previous attempt? I think the rest of the series will be easier to review that way.

-- larsh