Sorry, I sent it in reply to the wrong message accidentally.

(Somehow it seems rather ironic that I'm trying to implement a feature
that provides plenty of live bullets, yet keep shooting myself with
the _MUA_.)

You wrote:
quoted text
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 09:53:54AM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote:
>=20
> > On the other hand it would be just as powerful.  Manually splitting a
> > hunk is, in the general case, only possible in "my" scheme.  However,
> > to make any difference, you later have to answer 'n' to some of the
> > sub-hunks.  So in "your" scheme, you could just have deleted the lines
> > in question.
>=20
> Sorry, I've gotten lost in which is mine and which is yours. Yours is
> the original patch or this patch? Mine is the proposal that spawned this
> patch, or my comments on this patch?

I should have provided a definition, sorry.  By "your" scheme, I meant
the one where one is restricted to deleting existing lines, and thus
deletes '-' lines to disable them; by "my" scheme, where one is free
to edit and changes '-' lines to context to disable them.

At least it's my current understanding that, under the above
definition, "your" scheme is what you actually proposed in
  http://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg67478.html
  [why doesn't Google find gmane?]
but I misunderstood and implemented "my" scheme.

[Let's just forget about the original patch at the top of the thread;
in retrospect, it _is_ clunky, and the UI didn't get any replies in
favour.]

=2D Thomas