Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On 10/05/2009 12:55 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
> Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>
>
>> On 10/02/2009 06:49 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Updated versions are attached.
>>> Comments are inline.
>>>
>>>
>> ACK to all three
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> 0001:
>>>>> * Is it possible to change the callbacks in elapi_resolve.c to
static?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> Done
>>>
>>>
>> Just one thing, it is better to squash the changes to the file that
>> actually introduces the functions, that way you have them correct in the
>> first patch, rather than non-static in first patch and fixed to static
>> in second.
>>
>>
>>
> I agree, but I think I had two sets of changes in the same file: one set
> for the first patch (changing to static) and another for the second (do
> not remember).
> To avoid doing editing and squashing twice I did it once and added on
> top of the second patch.
> Is it a bad practice? Seems like a bit of overkill to me to do it twice
> but I am a novice to the common practices of git so please guide me :-).
>
>
>
Yes, it's a bad practice to have unrelated changes in a patch. Most
notably because it makes it difficult to apply just one of them if the
other isn't ready yet.
There are a couple ways to split patches. The easiest way is probably
with 'git add -i' (interactive) which allows you to select individual
portions of a diff for including into a commit.
Ok, point taken.
> _______________________________________________
> sssd-devel mailing list
> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
--
Thank you,
Dmitri Pal
Engineering Manager IPA project,
Red Hat Inc.
-------------------------------
Looking to carve out IT costs?
www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/