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-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, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F0811F461 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:56:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390294AbfIET4K (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 15:56:10 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:54038 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1733174AbfIET4K (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 15:56:10 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E143A2A083; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 15:56:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) 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=i0a1kpij6ts85ra6yLK7XSW89Js=; b=ORk2t6 xBEanG5OMahhlOFT2Ml4K5BBGExyO5U/DCWTxVpJTK7lUCBjoxIyyZajpiA4fne1 g3k4Tk44Vpa7sGsZyHJIWFq6wdV66F6oAySoF0Y9p7MjBxdK96Ce58UjfHd18pEL pht8AB9k8GaUSLau3YiylXuMqUsYUzifid7B4= 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=KOM6RXQ1csj41CIyTjRTUiVEg89azy2u Wz0W0zcMwfs5fZqSPjOoN4jngFOuVX+Xsyn1yZ+FUhA69qJMdKbVqqvTnqci2PYF YfI7m5kxcpqft/I3KdWpEi6A6SaExdt/ll7k316F6EwpiJNEyIPE+4FJP1YuxXAM 8ULpcWe8MRg= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87042A082; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 15:56:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4746A2A081; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 15:56:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Denton Liu Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Git Mailing List , Eric Sunshine , Johannes Sixt , Philip Oakley Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] format-patch: clean up tests and documentation References: <20190904112105.GA27933@archbookpro.localdomain> Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 12:56:06 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20190904112105.GA27933@archbookpro.localdomain> (Denton Liu's message of "Wed, 4 Sep 2019 04:21:05 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 33303346-D017-11E9-B092-D1361DBA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Denton Liu writes: > Hi Junio, > > I see that "dl/format-patch-doc-test-cleanup" currently has the comment > "Expecting a reroll." This should be the reroll that you're expecting ;) > > Also, since there haven't been any comments on the topic in a while, I > propose that it should be ready for inclusion. I may be the only person who had issues applying that series from the list, with mixtures of iso-8859-1 and utf-8 causing troubles, but if I am not alone, I suspect that the reason why nobody gave a comment is because the patches did not even apply so there is nothing to base their comments on. I wiggled them and compared the result. The range diff against what has been queued seems a bit different from what you gave below (e.g. I see log message got modified on patch #2 and the dropping of the comma made it harder to read), but the endpoint diff looks not too bad (IOW, the alloted time for the topic ran out before I started looking at each individual patches in more depth).