Re: [PATCH v8 00/17] Upstreaming the Scalar command
From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <hidden>
Date: 2021-11-22 16:50:03
On Mon, Nov 22 2021, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi Elijah, On Sat, 20 Nov 2021, Elijah Newren wrote:quoted
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 3:03 PM Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
tl;dr: This series contributes the core part of the Scalar command to the Git project. This command provides an opinionated way to create and configure Git repositories with a focus on very large repositories.I thought after https://lore.kernel.org/git/nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2110062241150.395@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet/ (local) that you'd update merge.renames to true on what is now patch 7. Did you end up changing your mind, or was this overlooked?Oops! Thank you so much for the reminder. Will fix. I do not plan on sending out a new iteration for a few more days because I do not want to send lots of patches to the list right now, reviewer bandwidth seems to be stretched quite a bit already.
Bandwidth which is further stretched by continuing to send updates to this topic while ignoring outstanding feedback. I.e. "seen" being broken now due to a merger of this topic and another topic of mine, which as noted in [1] is really just revealing an existing breakage in this topic, which I sent you an unresponded-to patch to fix almost a month ago.
quoted
Other than that, this round looks good to me. (I have no opinion on the build system integration, other than that I like it being optional and not installed by default.)Yes, I very much wanted to keep this optional and as well-encapsulated as possible for the moment. (Hence the way it integrates with Git's build process.) Thank you for chiming in!
Whatever disagreement we have about the particulars of how scalar lands in-tree is one thing, and I'd be the first to admit that some of the stuff I've been suggesting is just my opinion. But I've also been pointing out in reviews of this series (all/most of which you've ignored) that there's specific things that are categorically broken in this series, and clearly not working as you intend them to work. And you're simply ignoring those reports. One of those is that your topic here changes CI in in a way that you clearly didn't intend, and which is an emergent unintended effect of how you're approaching this scalar integration. I.e. the compile-only CI targets now doing tests as a result, which is broken, and the combination of that and my CI topic revealed that breakage. Anyway, as noted in [2] I was hoping to leave this whole scalar thing behind, since I got tired of those reports/suggestions being ignored. I'm only replying here again because it's clear that you don't understand some of the things this scalar topic breaks/changes, and the only reason you wouldn't understand that is because you've been ignoring specific reports/patches-on top that address those breakages. 1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/211122.86ee78yxts.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com/ (local) 2. https://lore.kernel.org/git/211110.86czn8hyis.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com/ (local)