From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073511F4B4 for ; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 08:53:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728700AbgI0Ipg (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Sep 2020 04:45:36 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:42464 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728443AbgI0Ipg (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Sep 2020 04:45:36 -0400 Received: (qmail 29251 invoked by uid 109); 27 Sep 2020 08:45:36 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 08:45:36 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 4231 invoked by uid 111); 27 Sep 2020 08:45:38 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 04:45:38 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2020 04:45:35 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Inclusive naming, part II Message-ID: <20200927084535.GB2465822@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20200921222458.GB3533110@coredump.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 06:29:50AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Thanks, I think that does look nicer. Shouldn't the latter bullet apply > > to most of the ones in patch 4, though? > > > > I wonder if they should simply be "s/master/topic/" instead of > > "s/master/main". > > Yes! I did that in 4/5. In 5/5, we need a branch name that starts with the > same two letters as `maint`, though. I amended the commit message > accordingly. That makes sense, and your commit message is clear. All of your v3 looks good to me. Thanks for your patience on these rather tedious changes. :) -Peff