From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Gated Merge? Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 11:06:04 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20160212190017.GA20801@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Andrew Ardill , "git\@vger.kernel.org" To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 12 20:06:15 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aUJ2k-0005oV-EV for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 20:06:14 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751035AbcBLTGK (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:06:10 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp0.int.icgroup.com ([208.72.237.35]:62167 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750961AbcBLTGI (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:06:08 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp0.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636C94266A; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:06:06 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=xskFuAkYij/TE33HSFyH4fCu8uY=; b=pAezRa /RkMycL6UincPpZO/SbWMU1TSPQeBOpaNCW2TkRexo2dqJxO8H74PIk/EHrJAk59 4BIuM+REetgyc9VqEbGUkq0YnLjRdRXrjnxzyI6WQD09OnbuQdmFzdYke/8Ug6ph 8IYMX50FDoiR4iPlEDPjQr/I5O4TerXBsaFwk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Vg8mQi4c49ooPL7mzRUOtJyHlSVkcSPf L18QAHAGS6Jbheh9IwnxWtXb54zr3zrT7Clk5IdsIC7RzfZVw4s3x6d5YT2A1wMr yg6RtDSTU72azS2SZ9JwjWwaHaiqIeRn6Q5o94Vfm8oiJjPD8UmmnKAvNrXUa0fq 3MTA7w5TWJQ= Received: from pb-smtp0.int.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp0.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A25042669; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:06:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.1.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp0.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CEC6042668; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:06:05 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20160212190017.GA20801@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:00:17 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AAC26C2A-D1BB-11E5-A158-79226BB36C07-77302942!pb-smtp0.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > But I don't think this needs to have anything to do with merges in > particular, or rules like "when merging a branch that does not have me > in it". It is about saying "from here on out, the tree state should > match this property, and we can test it by running this script". And > then running "make code-lint-tests" becomes part of the acceptance > testing for a proposed topic merge, just like "make test" is already > (and likewise, people forking _new_ branches from master after the topic > is merged would make sure they do not fail the code-lint tests before > even submitting the topic). That certainly is true, but this strays more and more from my original motive of implementing an automated evil-merge scheme that is better than what I currently have. We try to do our tree-wide refactoring in such a way that it would break the compilation (by changing function signature) when we can. Catching with "make test" would certainly generalize it, but the endgame result I was shooting for was to come up with a solution for each topic in-flight just once and keep replaying it until it is merged.