From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/13] lint: Remove an unneeded clause in
	'check-patch-file-names'.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:00:38 +0100
Message-ID: <871t94qqjd.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <1453666771-16869-1-git-send-email-mthl@gnu.org>
	<1453666771-16869-3-git-send-email-mthl@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57520)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1aO62u-0000wl-V9
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:00:50 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1aO62q-0002SQ-PW
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:00:44 -0500
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:38653)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1aO62q-0002SL-MN
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:00:40 -0500
In-Reply-To: <1453666771-16869-3-git-send-email-mthl@gnu.org> (Mathieu
	Lirzin's message of "Sun, 24 Jan 2016 21:19:20 +0100")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Mathieu Lirzin <mthl@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Mathieu Lirzin <mthl@gnu.org> skribis:

> * guix/scripts/lint.scm (check-patch-file-names): Don't check if patches
> start with the package full name since matching the package name (which
> is a prefix of the full name) is sufficient.

Indeed, OK.