Re: Protocol v2 in v2.27 (Re: Re* [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.27.0-rc1)

Derrick Stolee [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Git 2.26 used protocol v2 as its default protocol, but soon after
release, users noticed that the protocol v2 negotiation code was prone
to fail when fetching from some remotes that are far ahead of others
(such as linux-next.git versus Linus's linux.git).  That has been
fixed by 0b07eecf6ed (Merge branch 'jt/v2-fetch-nego-fix',
2020-05-01),

Should we really mention the merge here? Is it because the "fix" is
spread across two commits? Why not say the tip of the topic?

Strictly speaking, the tip of the topic is sufficient.  You can use
a third-party script "git when-merged" to ask "which exact merge
gave us this commit in the mainline?" when given only the tip of the
topic, which is what I often end up doing.

Writing the merge result reduces the need for doing the same
"reverse" look-up.

On the other hand, going the other way to find the then-current tip
of the topic from the result of the merge is much easier; you can
ask the merge result what its second parent is.

The rest of your review I can entirely agree with.  Thanks, always,
for a prompt and well written review.