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=-4.0 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 801FB1FA21 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 08:48:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755672AbdJJIsR (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Oct 2017 04:48:17 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:57494 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755165AbdJJIsQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Oct 2017 04:48:16 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DACB9925A7; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 04:48:10 -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=Qza4CDkmYAnPo3pfVRvjwM1Qnxg=; b=QkrUWs TDYtBEt6lxBdNkFuQqNkTFOTEQ8/Wn9/pkrLnQfEnWJEbK537w0czm3AN/lpPK4O XlHH1q5tupMuW99HOkiviPqNqtOpiCYMJq+ckHEC9L01d7/4OiSIm7hCB7Pq6OwH gFA7/8GzE0ekfVcB/1V9Ysfxu7kaDVzGKAllw= 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=C8dY7u84JpDtJymaIP5Zflp5zZCUqVWI d6xzpx7ys1gsYf7lOJo6gjGL2TBqSKabeQDybWIRiTkHjaI43PxHl6GfrRD/Q5Fv UmWO/rbiHnhVBLb020XgSbVixedNB3hgOpb7/l3Hqs7uTQ/r0dzvdFqtNnRKe0C8 r40EIUwLFto= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE6CA925A6; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 04:48:10 -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 2CE54925A2; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 04:48:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Nathan PAYRE Cc: Git Mailing List , daniel.bensoussan--bohm@etu.univ-lyon1.fr, timothee.albertin@etu.univ-lyon1.fr, "Robert P. J. Day" , matthieu.moy@univ-lyon1.fr, PAYRE NATHAN p1508475 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git-config.txt: reword missleading sentence References: <20171005081733.18529-1-nathan.payre@etu.univ-lyon1.fr> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:48:08 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Nathan PAYRE's message of "Tue, 10 Oct 2017 10:19:59 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BE50D498-AD97-11E7-9956-575F0C78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Nathan PAYRE writes: > Thanks you for the this complete answer, > we take note of your comments. > > We would like to reword something else in the same line > and we don't know what is the best way to do that properly. > Should we do a [PATCH v2] or revert the last commit and > commit a new one? I'd imagine that it is in the same spirit of the old one (i.e. "let's make it less confusing"), so let's have a single patch that has both changes which is [PATCH v2]. Thanks.