Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] Documentation: add caveats about I/O buffering for check-{attr,ignore}

2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] Documentation: add caveats about I/O buffering for check-{attr,ignore}

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:48

Adam Spiers [off-list ref] writes:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:09:28AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
Reflowing of the text is very much unappreciated X-<.  
I very much appreciate the excellent job you do as maintainer; your
attention to detail results in an incredibly high quality project.
However I do occasionally find your communication style unnecessarily
abrasive.  Maybe that's just me.
Sorry for being me X-<.  Yeah, I agree that the above came out to be
more blunt than needed.

It is usually OK to re-flow the text in the paragraph you are
touching. After all, for the purpose of reviewing, people can just
blindly apply and then ask "diff --color-words".  In this case,
however, there was some changes that conflict in the vicinity, and
reflowing made the resolution unnecessarily more cumbersome.

I have briefly looked at this series, but it severely conflicts with
a few topics in flight that touch the infrastructure you are using,
so I haven't merged it to 'pu'. Perhaps after things calm down, we
may want to ask you to reroll on top of updated codebase.

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] Documentation: add caveats about I/O buffering for check-{attr,ignore}

From: Adam Spiers <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:48

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 07:12:22PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
It is usually OK to re-flow the text in the paragraph you are
touching. After all, for the purpose of reviewing, people can just
blindly apply and then ask "diff --color-words".  In this case,
however, there was some changes that conflict in the vicinity, and
reflowing made the resolution unnecessarily more cumbersome.
I see.  Thanks for the tip; I was only dimly aware of --color-words.
I have briefly looked at this series, but it severely conflicts with
a few topics in flight that touch the infrastructure you are using,
so I haven't merged it to 'pu'. Perhaps after things calm down, we
may want to ask you to reroll on top of updated codebase.
Sure, no problem.  I'll try a quick rebase now to see how ugly it is.

By the way, I've replaced my test for streaming --stdin which was
based on stdbuf(1) and sleep(1) with Peff's clever hack based on
mkfifo.  I'll hold off from sending a reroll until pathspec activity
cools down, but in the meantime it's available here:

    https://github.com/aspiers/git/compare/master...git-annex-streaming

It requires my "t: make PIPE a standard test prerequisite" patch, but
I notice that's already in master which will make things easier later
on.

Thanks!
Adam
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help