You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flume.apache.org by Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com> on 2012/10/15 22:07:59 UTC
[DISCUSS] patch format
Traditionally as a project we have generated patches with --no-prefix.
As Mike said on ReviewBoard:
"--no-prefix used to be required to generate a patch that was
compatible with both Subversion and Git, but since we have switched
over to using only Git it should not be necessary anymore. Still, I've
regenerated the patch with --no-prefix."
As a project should we switch over to the default git prefix? I am
fine with the current scenario or using a prefix, I'd just like us to
be consistent.
Brock
Re: [DISCUSS] patch format
Posted by Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com>.
Yes I am +1/2 on *not* using --no-prefix since it's less typing.
If no one responds and disagrees, let's stop using --no-prefix.
Brock
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> I have similar opinion that I do not much care. However I tent to not use --no-prefix as it means less typing for me. But I'm good with both options.
>
> Jarcec
>
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 05:34:20PM -0700, Mike Percy wrote:
>> I don't have a strong preference, as long as it works with Review Board I'm
>> fine with doing whatever.
>>
>> Regards
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Traditionally as a project we have generated patches with --no-prefix.
>> > As Mike said on ReviewBoard:
>> >
>> > "--no-prefix used to be required to generate a patch that was
>> > compatible with both Subversion and Git, but since we have switched
>> > over to using only Git it should not be necessary anymore. Still, I've
>> > regenerated the patch with --no-prefix."
>> >
>> > As a project should we switch over to the default git prefix? I am
>> > fine with the current scenario or using a prefix, I'd just like us to
>> > be consistent.
>> >
>> > Brock
>> >
--
Apache MRUnit - Unit testing MapReduce - http://incubator.apache.org/mrunit/
Re: [DISCUSS] patch format
Posted by Jarek Jarcec Cecho <ja...@apache.org>.
I have similar opinion that I do not much care. However I tent to not use --no-prefix as it means less typing for me. But I'm good with both options.
Jarcec
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 05:34:20PM -0700, Mike Percy wrote:
> I don't have a strong preference, as long as it works with Review Board I'm
> fine with doing whatever.
>
> Regards
> Mike
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > Traditionally as a project we have generated patches with --no-prefix.
> > As Mike said on ReviewBoard:
> >
> > "--no-prefix used to be required to generate a patch that was
> > compatible with both Subversion and Git, but since we have switched
> > over to using only Git it should not be necessary anymore. Still, I've
> > regenerated the patch with --no-prefix."
> >
> > As a project should we switch over to the default git prefix? I am
> > fine with the current scenario or using a prefix, I'd just like us to
> > be consistent.
> >
> > Brock
> >
Re: [DISCUSS] patch format
Posted by Mike Percy <mp...@apache.org>.
I don't have a strong preference, as long as it works with Review Board I'm
fine with doing whatever.
Regards
Mike
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Traditionally as a project we have generated patches with --no-prefix.
> As Mike said on ReviewBoard:
>
> "--no-prefix used to be required to generate a patch that was
> compatible with both Subversion and Git, but since we have switched
> over to using only Git it should not be necessary anymore. Still, I've
> regenerated the patch with --no-prefix."
>
> As a project should we switch over to the default git prefix? I am
> fine with the current scenario or using a prefix, I'd just like us to
> be consistent.
>
> Brock
>