On Thu Aug 21, 2025 at 2:50 AM CEST, Junio C Hamano wrote: > For a topic that is older than 6 weeks, I am afraid that is a losing > strategy. People who might have cared about the topic said all they > wanted to say, new people are less likely to discover the topic than > it was fresh, and unless you make an action (e.g., posting the "next > patch version" you mentioned in [*1*]), it is highly unlikely for > anything to happen while you are passive. Even a small update that > addresses all the little feedback would serve as a "ping" to reignite > interests. > > You seem to have liked the approach to generalize and encode all the > commit object headers (except for of course the object name and > author and committer ident, which already have place to be in the > format-patch output) on an e-mail header in [*2*]. That should be > sufficient for a small update that tries to reignite interests. Oh, of course. For some reason I had had the notion that I had already written a v3 based on this feedback and it was awaiting further comments. But in fact I have done no such thing. I'll put this back on my todo list and get a v3 out in the foreseeable future.
Attachment:
42F3F1862E3CC4B8.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
