Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Tests and fixes for merge-recursive rename options

Felipe Gonçalves Assis [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

As I said, I am reluctant to take the 25%/50%/75% tests in their
current form.  Let me take the first one and a half of the last one
(i.e. excluding the test) for now.

Thanks.

Ok, should I post a new version of the patch without the tests while I
rework them or does that mean that you have already filtered them out
locally?

I already have and queued them tentatively as 

    c443d39 merge-recursive: find-renames resets threshold
    83837ec merge-strategies.txt: fix typo

but they haven't been merged to 'next', so it is up to you whether
you rebuild the remainder on top of c443d39 or redo these 5 patches
altogether (just tell me to drop these two if you go the latter
route).

Thanks.

On 22 February 2016 at 19:29, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

Felipe Gonçalves Assis [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

As I said, I am reluctant to take the 25%/50%/75% tests in their
current form.  Let me take the first one and a half of the last one
(i.e. excluding the test) for now.

Thanks.

Ok, should I post a new version of the patch without the tests while I
rework them or does that mean that you have already filtered them out
locally?

I already have and queued them tentatively as

    c443d39 merge-recursive: find-renames resets threshold
    83837ec merge-strategies.txt: fix typo

but they haven't been merged to 'next', so it is up to you whether
you rebuild the remainder on top of c443d39 or redo these 5 patches
altogether (just tell me to drop these two if you go the latter
route).

My original patch started with exactly those commits and then added
the tests, so it is fine for me.

The motivation for the reorganisation was bundling the relevant test
with the fix, but then it might be better to publish the fix soon,
right?