Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Remove more index compatibility macros

4 messages, 3 authors, 2021-01-26 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Remove more index compatibility macros

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2021-01-10 07:04:10

"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref] writes:
UPDATE: this is now based on ag/merge-strategies-in-c to avoid conflicts in
'seen'. The changes in builtin/rm.c still conflict with
mt/rm-sparse-checkout, but that branch seems to be waiting for a clearer
plan on some corner cases. I thought about ejecting it, but 'rm' still uses
ce_match_stat(), so just dropping the patch gives less of a final stake at
the end of the series. (I'm still open to it, if necessary.)
I haven't read this latest iteration myself yet beyond the cover
letter, but tonight's 'seen' has this queued near its tip.  I expect
it would either stay there or occasionally ejected, until the base
topic solidifies a bit more.
 * Methods that know about the 'repo' pointer no longer also have an
   'istate' pointer and instead prefer 'repo->index'

 * This includes the callback_data struct which only has a 'repo' member, no
   'istate'.
OK.

Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Remove more index compatibility macros

From: Eric Sunshine <hidden>
Date: 2021-01-10 07:33:09

On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
UPDATE: this is now based on ag/merge-strategies-in-c to avoid conflicts in
'seen'. The changes in builtin/rm.c still conflict with
mt/rm-sparse-checkout, but that branch seems to be waiting for a clearer
plan on some corner cases. I thought about ejecting it, but 'rm' still uses
ce_match_stat(), so just dropping the patch gives less of a final stake at
the end of the series. (I'm still open to it, if necessary.)
I haven't read this latest iteration myself yet beyond the cover
letter, but tonight's 'seen' has this queued near its tip.  I expect
it would either stay there or occasionally ejected, until the base
topic solidifies a bit more.
quoted
 * Methods that know about the 'repo' pointer no longer also have an
   'istate' pointer and instead prefer 'repo->index'

 * This includes the callback_data struct which only has a 'repo' member, no
   'istate'.
OK.
I looked this version of the series over and did not find anything
else about which to comment.

Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Remove more index compatibility macros

From: Derrick Stolee <hidden>
Date: 2021-01-10 11:58:12

On 1/10/2021 2:03 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
UPDATE: this is now based on ag/merge-strategies-in-c to avoid conflicts in
'seen'. The changes in builtin/rm.c still conflict with
mt/rm-sparse-checkout, but that branch seems to be waiting for a clearer
plan on some corner cases. I thought about ejecting it, but 'rm' still uses
ce_match_stat(), so just dropping the patch gives less of a final stake at
the end of the series. (I'm still open to it, if necessary.)
I haven't read this latest iteration myself yet beyond the cover
letter, but tonight's 'seen' has this queued near its tip.  I expect
it would either stay there or occasionally ejected, until the base
topic solidifies a bit more.
Thanks. I'll continue to watch that topic and provide review as
new versions come out.

-Stolee

Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Remove more index compatibility macros

From: Derrick Stolee <hidden>
Date: 2021-01-26 20:54:08

On 1/10/2021 2:03 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
UPDATE: this is now based on ag/merge-strategies-in-c to avoid conflicts in
'seen'. The changes in builtin/rm.c still conflict with
mt/rm-sparse-checkout, but that branch seems to be waiting for a clearer
plan on some corner cases. I thought about ejecting it, but 'rm' still uses
ce_match_stat(), so just dropping the patch gives less of a final stake at
the end of the series. (I'm still open to it, if necessary.)
I haven't read this latest iteration myself yet beyond the cover
letter, but tonight's 'seen' has this queued near its tip.  I expect
it would either stay there or occasionally ejected, until the base
topic solidifies a bit more.
Junio,

Please drop this series for now. I'll be introducing a new series soon
that will collide with it and this is a lower priority.

I'll probably come back to revisit removing these macros, but I'll do
so one builtin at a time when others are not modifying them at the
same time.

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