Re: "git intepret-trailers" vs. "sed script" to add the signature
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jul 5, 2017, 01:48 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqr2xvk61m.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <1499195804.6428.2.camel@gmail.com>
Kaartic Sivaraam <kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com> writes:
Show 16 quoted lines
> On Mon, 2017-07-03 at 09:58 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Kaartic Sivaraam <kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > I'll send a typical patch that uses "git interpret-headers" as a >> > follow-up. >> >> When you say a "typical" patch, what do you exactly mean? Does >> anybody else send typical patches (or atypical ones for that matter) >> to the list? >> > I apologise for the inconsistent wordings. I try to mean a patch which > I'm not sure is acceptable (or) not. I guess that's [PATCH/RFC] in the > language of this list. I'm not acquainted to the wordings as I'm an > "off-list" person trying to help and get help! I'll try to use > consistent wordings as far as I could. Once again, please excuse my > ignorance.
Oh no need to apologise for "ignorance"; that goes both ways. I wasn't familiar with a phrase you used "a typical patch" (which I suspected that is something you may be used to from your involvement in other development community) and showing _my_ ignorance and asking for help to clarify, so that both of us can understand each other better.
My reading of your response is that it is a normal patch that proposes a change, as opposed to the final version of a patch meant for inclusion, after it has been discussed here and everybody supports---let me know if I am still not reading you correctly.
Thanks.