> No, my intention was to avoid complications. Like introducing yet anotherDo you think my three line patch is too complicated? Possibly I was too zealous in documenting the semantics for the new hook and that looked like unelegant semantics. Do you have another possibility which allows the same workflow (git commit shows the output of that script) within the existing framework? Paolo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Thomas Gleixner | Re: Linux 2.6.21-rc1 |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| James Bottomley | [Ksummit-2008-discuss] Fixing the Kernel Janitors project |
| James Morris | Re: LSM conversion to static interface |
git: | |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| Christoph Hellwig | Re: [PATCH 06/32] IGET: Mark iget() and read_inode() as being obsolete [try #2] |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH take 2] pkt_sched: Protect gen estimators under est_lock. |
