Thus spake Nick Mathewson (nickm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx): > On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Mike Perry <mikeperry@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I've now rebased, split, and squashed all the commits into 8 > > logically distinct patches in mikeperry/consensus-bw-weights4. > > Should be easier to review for those who prefer to look at things > > one commit at a time. > > > > Ouch. This is great for people who want to read your patch series de > novo, and it's good for clarity once we merge it into Tor's main > history, but it makes stuff harder for people who've been reviewing > the old patch series unless you say something like, "BTW, commit X in > consensus-bw-weights4 corresponds to exactly the same changes as you > had looked at up until now in consesus-bw-weights3, just cleaned up a > little." Ah yes, the branches should be equivalent and have and empty diff between them after you rebase both to the latest origin/master (unless I forgot a push?), but I had commited one or two changes to consensus-bw-weights3 since you reviewed it. You can do a git fetch of course to see the new diffs in consesus-bw-weights3. Not sure where you left off, but the new commits are just the fixes for your code review and the additional fix to always weight by bandwidth, as I mentioned on or-talk. -- Mike Perry Mad Computer Scientist fscked.org evil labs
Attachment:
pgp6uFVj7zt1K.pgp
Description: PGP signature