From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/3] archive: rename attribute specfile to export-subst Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:03:40 -0700 Message-ID: <7vd4wva4lv.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <46DC4D45.4030208@lsrfire.ath.cx> <7vtzqb8fw2.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <46DCF0EF.9020604@op5.se> <46DDE69C.1080908@lsrfire.ath.cx> <7vzm02klip.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <46E02FFF.8090902@lsrfire.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Scharfe , Andreas Ericsson , Git Mailing List , Michael Gernoth , Thomas Glanzmann To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Sep 06 23:04:09 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1ITOW5-0004rx-K3 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 23:03:58 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932448AbXIFVDw (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 17:03:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932249AbXIFVDv (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 17:03:51 -0400 Received: from rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.210.124.37]:59400 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932170AbXIFVDv (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 17:03:51 -0400 Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 466DD12DFFB; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 17:04:04 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Thu, 6 Sep 2007 18:13:29 +0100 (BST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: > The bigger question is now if these two patches should be folded back into > your original patch series, or stand alone as commits of their own... That is no brainer, as there is a simple and hard rule that any topic already in 'next' are not to be rewound ever. Follow-up patches are the right thing to do in this case.