Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sep 20, 2016, 06:33 UTC
Message-ID: <e0ceef8e-1809-1503-eb85-ab0f2c678e6d@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqintrg5pq.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On 09/19/2016 07:27 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 22 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> 
>> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
>>
>>> On 09/08/2016 01:25 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>> I'd move it temporarily to t4061 with a separate SQUASH??? at the
>>>> tip for now, as I am running out of time today.
>>>
>>> I didn't realize you were waiting for an ACK. Yes, it's totally OK to
>>> rename the test.
>>
>> I actually wasn't asking for an Ack.
>>
>> As the issue was in the one that is buried a few commits from the
>> tip, and there is a later one that adds more tests to it, I didn't
>> find enough energy to rename the new file in a buried commit and
>> then adjust the patch later updates it, I was hoping that you'd
>> reroll to save me effort, rather than forcing me to do the rebase
>> myself ;-).
> 
> Now I did, so no need to resend (unless you have changes other than
> the renaming of the test script, that is).

Thanks for taking care of this.

> Let's move it down to 'next' soonish.

Yes, it would be good to get feedback early enough in the cycle that we can make a final decision about which diff heuristics should be used by default and whether/what UI to implement for switching between them.

Michael