On Thu, 1 May 2008, Theodore Ts'o wrote:I'd suggest not sending out patches like this. If the patch is largely a rename one, and sent out for review, just use "git diff -M -p --stat --summary", because it's going to be a *lot* more reviewable that way. Yeah, it means that people need git to apply it, but by now we can probably take that for granted - and more importantly, even if they don't have git installed: when you send out of RFC, aren't you looking for commentary more than people to apply and test it? And then the patch saying that it's a rename (with perhaps changes to the guard #ifdef thing) would be a lot more clear. Nobody is going to read a patch that is 2800 lines of mostly create/delete with presumably almost no actual changes? Linus --
| Ryan Hope | reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 |
| Ingo Molnar | Re: 2.6.24-rc6-mm1 |
| Tejun Heo | [PATCHSET] CUSE: implement CUSE |
| Peter Zijlstra | Re: 2.6.24-rc8-mm1 (BUG: sched_rt) |
git: | |
| Shawn O. Pearce | Re: [PATCH/POLL] git-format-patch: the default suffix is now .patch, not .txt |
| Jakub Narebski | Re: What's cooking in git.git (topics) |
| Junio C Hamano | Maintaining "needswork" section of "What's (not) cooking" |
| Matthias Lederhofer | [PATCH] prune-packed: new option --min-age=N |
| Theo de Raadt | That whole "Linux stealing our code" thing |
| Karthik Kumar | Re: Real men don't attack straw men |
| Khalid Schofield | Configuring sendmail openbsd 4.2 |
| Ray Percival | Re: Real men don't attack straw men |
| RW | Re: forcefsck on booting stage |
| Vladimir Terziev | Video memory as swap under FreeBSD |
| Ivan Voras | Progress for 7.0 - the "what's cooking" page |
| Pietro Cerutti | Re: [patch] enhance powerd(8) to handle max temperature |
