From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0C0E20899 for ; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 19:38:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752064AbdHNTiH (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:38:07 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:57428 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751030AbdHNTh7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:37:59 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BC44ADFAF; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:37:52 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=aP2Huwz8bSjjD1/t/7Xh7Kp5S7M=; b=WPiTnQ sCGblbAw7ac0oOcoDREj6A1FBOb+5f3eqj7JQBFCatD0ufXG4g46TVBWPb1bzNgO PhhuJfkOoMMOHI6g0FtTDHyQhUHA0wBe6CR+dOnnGIWaTUtBE2vJYOgQRTUFf/9d OMAi0nmDg4VMOOqrydET3iHx2CBJ8KaDJ8F8w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=QMuDCrrwd6UKkoEFuifjhn1D7sNhqPRq k1sEGZMJtcRR2l1B6N1EQdy6B5CxuHRgWTAF8LhHFpPPnMahR8f+4AmQv7i5Uz1s MpHtBXfFT2kCoJp+MWolIGaaL6UV1nYOszqal6dfslHJwi/Dl4w0Xq9Qh4oDKHRy lDO+TyzaZvE= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24459ADFAE; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:37:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A8D6ADFA9; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:37:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Stefan Beller Cc: Jonathan Tan , "git\@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Fixes to "diff --color-moved" MIN_BLOCK_LENGTH handling References: Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:37:50 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Beller's message of "Mon, 14 Aug 2017 10:29:07 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 0F70C154-8128-11E7-AEF3-9D2B0D78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Stefan Beller writes: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > ... >> My preference however is to keep sb/diff-color-move topic as-is >> without replacing and fixing it with incremental updates like these >> patches. > > I would have hoped to not need to reroll that topic. > Though I do find patches 1&2 valuable either on top or squashed > into "[PATCH] diff.c: color moved lines differently" and > "[PATCH] diff.c: color moved lines differently, plain mode" > respectively. > > So I'd ask to pick at least patches 1&2 on top of that series, please? Yeah, that is exactly what I did before reading this message but after reading your comments on the patches ;-) > (I am missing the context for *why* you preference is to not do > exactly this). I see what I wrote can be misread, especially due to its lack of ",instead", that I want to keep the broken one as-is, with neither reroll nor fixup. That is not what I meant. - If you choose to squash so that the resulting history after the series graduates to 'master' will be simpler to read (due to lack of "oops, that was a mistake"), I do not mind a reroll. - On the other hand, as the topic has been in 'next' for some time and presumably people tried it in their real daily work when needed, keeping what is queued as-is has a value---we have a fixed reference point that we can go back to to compare the code with and without the fix. I do not have a strong preference, but if I were asked to choose, I'd choose the latter. Thanks.