Short-term plans for the post 2.9 cycle

4 messages, 3 authors, 2016-06-24 · open the first message on its own page

Short-term plans for the post 2.9 cycle

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-19 22:52:44

Here are the list of topics that are in the "private edition" I use
for every day work, grouped by where they sit in the the near-term
plan of merging them up to 'next' and then to 'master'.

These will be merged to 'master' soonish.

 ew/fast-import-unpack-limit
 ah/no-verify-signature-with-pull-rebase
 ew/daemon-socket-keepalive
 sb/submodule-misc-cleanups
 sb/submodule-recommend-shallowness
 et/pretty-format-c-auto
 jg/dash-is-last-branch-in-worktree-add
 aq/upload-pack-use-parse-options
 jc/clear-pathspec
 wd/userdiff-css
 jk/rev-list-count-with-bitmap
 rs/xdiff-hunk-with-func-line

These will be in 'next' immediately after the above gets merged to
'master'.

 cc/apply-introduce-state

These have been in 'next', but will be kicked back to give them
chance to clean up when 'next' is rewound.

 mh/split-under-lock
 mh/ref-iterators
 jc/attr
 sb/pathspec-label

These are expected to be merged to 'next' in the first batch after
'next' gets rewound.

 pc/occurred
 tr/doc-tt
 ap/git-svn-propset-doc
 jk/fetch-prune-doc
 dn/gpg-doc
 pb/strbuf-read-file-doc
 lf/receive-pack-auto-gc-to-client
 mg/cherry-pick-multi-on-unborn
 sg/reflog-past-root
 vs/prompt-avoid-unset-variable
 rj/compat-regex-size-max-fix
 jk/avoid-unbounded-alloca
 et/add-chmod-x
 jc/deref-tag
 nb/gnome-keyring-build
 lv/status-say-working-tree-not-directory
 tb/complete-status
 em/newer-freebsd-shells-are-fine-with-returns

These are the second batch for 'next'.

 km/fetch-do-not-free-remote-name
 jk/parseopt-string-list
 jk/string-list-static-init
 lf/sideband-returns-void
 jk/bisect-show-tree
 jk/add-i-diff-compact-heuristics
 jk/big-and-future-archive-tar
 jk/send-pack-stdio
 lf/recv-sideband-cleanup
 pb/commit-editmsg-path
 nd/test-lib-httpd-show-error-log-in-verbose
 ep/http-curl-trace

These are the third batch.

 mh/connect
 ew/mboxrd-format-am
 jk/repack-keep-unreachable
 jk/gpg-interface-cleanup
 sb/submodule-clone-retry
 mg/signature-doc

These are the fourth.

 nd/worktree-cleanup-post-head-protection
 jk/upload-pack-hook
 nd/graph-width-padded
 nd/shallow-deepen
 sb/submodule-default-paths
 nd/worktree-lock

These are the remainder.

 jc/blame-reverse
 jc/send-email-skip-backup
 va/i18n-even-more
 dt/index-helper
 dk/blame-move-no-reason-for-1-line-context
 sb/clone-shallow-passthru

Some of them that are regression fixes may need to jump the queue
and land on 'master' earlier than others.

Re: Short-term plans for the post 2.9 cycle

From: Stefan Beller <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-20 16:47:24

On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Here are the list of topics that are in the "private edition" I use
for every day work, grouped by where they sit in the the near-term
plan of merging them up to 'next' and then to 'master'.

These will be merged to 'master' soonish.
Thanks for such an overview!

Re: Short-term plans for the post 2.9 cycle

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-20 17:06:28

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Stefan Beller [off-list ref] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Here are the list of topics that are in the "private edition" I use
for every day work, grouped by where they sit in the the near-term
plan of merging them up to 'next' and then to 'master'.

These will be merged to 'master' soonish.
Thanks for such an overview!
FYI, this can be obtained by running "git log --oneline --first-parent
master..pu".
The point where "Merge ... into jch" ends is what I usually use myself
(IOW, I do
attempt to build and test 'pu', but I do not run it regularly).

Re: Short-term plans for the post 2.9 cycle

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-24 15:48:08

On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 03:52:04PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Here are the list of topics that are in the "private edition" I use
for every day work, grouped by where they sit in the the near-term
plan of merging them up to 'next' and then to 'master'.
By the way, I wondered if you had thoughts on the number of the upcoming
version. We are looking at v2.10 in the current scheme. It was at the
v1.9/v1.10 boundary that we jumped to v2.0 last time.

Certainly it is nice to avoid bumping into double digits (if only to
prevent bugs created by lexical sorting). But it feels rather quick to
be jumping to v3.0. And indeed it is much quicker, as the v1.x series
had an extra level of versioning which meant that the second-biggest
number advanced ten times more slowly.

I know some people's opinion is that versions do not matter, are just
numbers, etc, but I am not sure I agree. If you have dots in your
version number, then bumping the one before the first dot seems like a
bigger change than usual, and I think we should reserve it for a moment
where we have bigger changes in the code.

And I am not at all sure that we have given much thought to what such
changes would be, or that such things would be ready in this cycle. Off
the top of my head, the repository-format bump for pluggable ref
backends, and protocol v2 support seem like possible candidates.  It's
not a flag day for either, of course; we'll build in all of the usual
backwards-compatibility flags. But it's convenient for users to remember
that "3.0" is the minimum to support a new slate of
backwards-incompatible features.

So my inclination is that the next version is simply v2.10. And maybe
you thought of all of this already, and that's why you didn't even
bother mentioning it. :) I'm just curious to hear any thoughts on the
matter.

-Peff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help