Re: [PATCH v2] for-each-ref: add %(upstream:gone) to mark missing refs

From: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 26, 2016, 06:31 UTC
Message-ID: <CAOLa=ZTY0fM_Z_t8nk+je4fao8ydF1dAXmG7RzgmJyoQUj7kSg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFaJEqs7vE4knXXOdKk+PxY2DZs=7BHGUJY_0a_aKF1ngnX+Lg@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

Show 20 quoted lines

>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 12:03 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah, right. I was feeling like this was all vaguely familiar. I think
>>> it would be better to push forward kn/ref-filter-branch-list.
>>> According to the last "what's cooking", I think that topic is waiting
>>> on more review. If you're willing and able to do so, that would be a
>>> big help.
>>>
>>
>> It's been waiting for review for a _long_ time now.
>>
>
> To be perfectly honest my C skills and familiarity with the git source
> code is not much to speak of. I very much want to take a close look but
> I cannot promise anything worth your time...
>
> But if I do find something I'd like to point out should I just reply
> directly to the e-mails containing the patches as one usually does even
> though they're months old at this point?
>

Not that your review would be absolute but it definitely would be a start.

Replying directly to the patches is the way to go I feel.

-- 
Regards,
Karthik Nayak