From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-b6-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b6-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.149]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DC1B350A10 for ; Tue, 9 Jun 2026 06:05:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.149 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780985122; cv=none; b=h5oBUBGR7mxzcG29yLq+l8GLTp0AaD0Lsj2G0gjVedn+OrNuYOAg08ddRIGilpHgUCkrN4050AFELuj83TfiCMklhQhknRZz5ovis9F2g/i7D4uTPmCxbko4li7SWiZBrWvfomhq6cA9Cl2ISRqg9ocZbwpRqkRry+/NfreVsSA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780985122; c=relaxed/simple; bh=CGDKctnc6aisbl1mZ8qrWh8HtPwzAdTEbGZkUmvom8A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=bNRNqTUbajivBxZLNX0S6erh1YvMuU3ek4frtzP+36R3bkPWRCQ33tz4u8AzZS33tKNCU2RObJ9hzu7shWTrthZcaPwCSPX1XA8J/jkRr6Fcg1fI+N/LXXFW5YLf3L/YUsQrVX7U/njFNtLS9Q/qdE/VTT1nZYCYtLHpjig1YqE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b=ZhRFp68z; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=RXW+rA89; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.149 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b="ZhRFp68z"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="RXW+rA89" Received: from phl-compute-04.internal (phl-compute-04.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE1AF1D00163; Tue, 9 Jun 2026 02:05:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-03 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-04.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 09 Jun 2026 02:05:19 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date:date :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1780985118; x=1781071518; bh=d2cbTqhJmijrlJBwT7y47kPlyq1rIjFb4UmJ7F5TXPg=; b= ZhRFp68z89yWluhm8N+aYBbpxukUWLQ2/lee2vuuUGmF4BOpgHdXZ3px9zHdmLSA h3SOE+4GWo1PfuGg/v7qR5aiqZAcQW77Cn5mwO/VGgS0dnbybcn5qIMCiUfmcEaL Jyu4p2tuHLsuFevxEVNNjVwuvSZgA6cp8dlzHIs64tXVrwpZtoukdEQhdphyIFEp B/oPQflPeAWE4NCvnlQqAZiGAz1F5ATDkS3zjUzCxdLjsSdb7Chi4V4Bp4jxsaro CbCy+EK8U4KSaQfKUQiM+HwTApggk71j4agnXyYAjZkuYB+chRES+eBHcz1cNPwn 23lWfpshPiAuunsQFj05jQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1780985118; x= 1781071518; bh=d2cbTqhJmijrlJBwT7y47kPlyq1rIjFb4UmJ7F5TXPg=; b=R XW+rA898bFmfi223KLgpRuWkG6H+SHiikNj/xntNapK7ZQ8bAr6nUvLKPLY+vuEf Pi0xEdd2H2p2uqmk2INMQ/KPw+mPs/vGJhTTwetxuT0rXq8tv9jQUbWByt8ETTq2 aIw9LzKujiNVax1ANpCh9d0iJKHFQxKGtz551s7AffFl97pEBVLa4iD3pbUADQzF SUZ+zOfq5OH985xBIs3zwlVHzFSrEuEGH/a1RMWFb0HKhL01aoj5zt0+NwLK0RwH pGNQRUQIBFAXG5/KBBdJ9830XGqI4hSNVedWT7TaGfi+QJ0OJLqKpoB2M+lh/TSG Ye3/snSn9vsDdfDGOCwAg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: dmFkZTEZ4iEoKBZKwlxzohtnt0pd0QtcxeemKFFuSLy0EnLIz2ByoCrrr+ClTejGU8g8CM DBZyCa/QMrOuxBaLVjHm8tgP7cBb5Bc9hq3X0wtdQXvU1uTsC1EdGB47TZY36FSJ/1O553 tNozZWB+fOOyr35ImvEY4eom8w+KeNKNi1U/rA9WL5yXWJc1z4YosCv/IBHLG5m10nd6Ul hgrfdtJ5A4DYgBOczxyDecgsIY3uIYSiY3l+wJvTeWnsa4kLKYDNF9f1Nrb9Oh5DVSYzE7 DIMbSafUpkog0ptm+q71W3aBnqiL7BUBut/vbxcheapOeAGCl6HBV/I8OvZIVu1nslI9kw CyXStm7LDOTHpk+GOUbD9bfIVfVZznfHwtW2lDEnLYZMVlZv3yEEfCUE/GOGOFEdNfOCEj 4G1m+TVUVsUJSnne/DHenqKonKlU/YibA7wMFD8MSPxqOwKc3pFEyGo2bA70Skw7naNtRh sMZBATmJrJHqDOLxH8qp76HSvlHUDqqstn3PmLOWuJ2xR5AttFuuIaYvujgXNUu9ltl+Yy LRYdc3t9A5KNKjmM6TrpbidqOq53OdUtQwLX2G2ROyMMIhPaviG1g362qEFGGY1zbZ3fgO R3oegAyg7MBrBpHzGjCi+T+l1et92W0bVRmCfMvPvGWbz9S0g8Tx26vaLsIg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 9 Jun 2026 02:05:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 99c1cb47 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Tue, 9 Jun 2026 06:05:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2026 08:05:11 +0200 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: Tamir Duberstein Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Karthik Nayak , Victoria Dye , ZheNing Hu Subject: Re: [PATCH] ref-filter: restore prefix-scoped iteration Message-ID: References: <20260605-fix-git-branch-regression-v1-1-02f40ad40929@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Mon, Jun 08, 2026 at 06:39:48PM -0400, Tamir Duberstein wrote: > On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 2:36 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > Tamir Duberstein writes: > > > > > diff --git a/ref-filter.c b/ref-filter.c > > > index 1da4c0e60d..2388a57b39 100644 > > > --- a/ref-filter.c > > > +++ b/ref-filter.c > > > @@ -3315,19 +3315,31 @@ static int do_filter_refs(struct ref_filter *filter, unsigned int type, refs_for > > > prefix = "refs/tags/"; > > > > > > if (prefix) { > > > > Below, adding an extra call to get_main_ref_store(the_repository) > > makes one line unnecessarily split and harder to read. How about > > doing > > > > struct ref_store *store = get_main_ref_store(the_repository); > > > > upfront here, and then use that to replace these two calls of > > get_main_ref_store(the_repository)? > > Yep, done in v2. > > Thanks for the review! > > By the way, how long should I wait before sending new versions of my > patches? I have 4 outstanding at the moment. I typically aim to send at most one version per day per patch series. This avoids that you're "flooding" the mailing list with too many versions of the same series, allows you to address feedback from multiple folks in batches, and it gives you enough time to think about the feedback without having to rush anything. Whether I actually do end up sending a series depends on a couple of factors: - How big is the series? The bigger it is the more time I give folks to perform reviews. - How substantial were the reviews you received? Is it just a couple of small typos? Then it probably makes sense to wait one or two more days to get some more involved reviews. Is it something that requires signifciant rework? Then I'd send out soon so that others don't review a patch series that will change significantly anyway. - How close to being merged is the series? The closer it is the less substantial the reviews will (hopefully) get, so it makes sense to reroll a bit faster even if you only received minor feedback. So there isn't really a golden rule to follow here, but a lot of this depends on gut feeling. You probably won't have that feeling yet when starting out in a new project, but that's fine. In case we see that behaviour doesn't quite match the norm we'll typically give a hint that the contributor should slow down or maybe send a new iteration. Patrick