From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1178 invoked by alias); 11 May 2011 06:04:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 1135 invoked by uid 22791); 11 May 2011 06:04:45 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 May 2011 06:04:27 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4B64Rj4017919 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 02:04:27 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4B64O3n030392 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 11 May 2011 02:04:26 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4B64OFf016345; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:04:24 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p4B64MHf014482; Wed, 11 May 2011 08:04:22 +0200 Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 06:04:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 0/3] readline-6.2 rebase Message-ID: <20110511060421.GA9857@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20110501122912.GA7206@host1.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00271.txt.bz2 On Mon, 09 May 2011 19:00:13 +0200, Tom Tromey wrote: > FWIW I think this is the best time to check this in, because the release > branch has been made. Do you think it should be checked in as separate patches (to unchanged readline-6.2 with each of the patches applied afterwards) or as a single commit? The previous import was a single-commit one with sourceware patches already contained: commit c6fad60c72bac0b0ba1b7912f866caa3a6cb744c Author: Daniel Jacobowitz Date: Fri May 5 18:26:14 2006 +0000 Readline 5.1 import for HEAD. Advantage of the single commit is it does not introduce intermedia regressions which makes it compatible with `git bisect'. (OTOH git bisect has various issues with building older snapshots on recent systems and also I am not sure if all the multi-part patches are per-piece regression+buildability safe.) Advantage of the multiple commits is sure more clear import for futher rebases and reviews. Porting the readline-5.1 patchset was a bit of reverse engineering with GIT. (I am more for the latter choice now; despite I proposed the former before.) Thanks, Jan