Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2025, #01; Sun, 3)

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

> On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 01:23:40AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> * ps/remote-rename-fix (2025-07-31) 7 commits
>>  - builtin/remote: only iterate through refs that are to be renamed
>>  - builtin/remote: rework how remote refs get renamed
>>  - builtin/remote: determine whether refs need renaming early on
>>  - builtin/remote: fix sign comparison warnings
>>  - refs: simplify logic when migrating reflog entries
>>  - refs: pass refname when invoking reflog entry callback
>>  - Merge branch 'ps/reflog-migrate-fixes' into ps/remote-rename-fix
>>  (this branch uses ps/reflog-migrate-fixes.)
>> 
>>  "git remote rename origin upstream" failed to move origin/HEAD to
>>  upstream/HEAD when origin/HEAD is unborn and performed other
>>  renames extremely inefficiently, which has been corrected.
>> 
>>  Will merge to 'next'?
>>  source: <20250731-pks-remote-rename-improvements-v2-0-dda6f083674d@pks.im>
>
> I've sent one more version of this patch series for a couple of final
> finishing touches. If Peff is happy with that version I'm happy to see
> it merged.

Hmph, you have?

>
>> * ps/reflog-migrate-fixes (2025-07-29) 9 commits
>>  - refs: fix invalid old object IDs when migrating reflogs
>>  - refs: stop unsetting REF_HAVE_OLD for log-only updates
>>  - refs/files: detect race when generating reflog entry for HEAD
>>  - refs: fix identity for migrated reflogs
>>  - ident: fix type of string length parameter
>>  - builtin/reflog: implement subcommand to write new entries
>>  - refs: export `ref_transaction_update_reflog()`
>>  - builtin/reflog: improve grouping of subcommands
>>  - Documentation/git-reflog: convert to use synopsis type
>>  (this branch is used by ps/remote-rename-fix.)
>> 
>>  "git refs migrate" to migrate the reflog entries from a refs
>>  backend to another had a handful of bugs squashed.
>> 
>>  Will merge to 'next'?
>>  source: <20250729-pks-reflog-append-v3-0-9614d310f073@pks.im>
>
> I'm happy with this version, so if the above goes in I think this one
> here can also be merged.

You have an update for this one.  Perhaps your comments are swapped
between these two topics?