From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephan Beyer Subject: Re: [GSoC] What is status of Git's Google Summer of Code 2008 projects? Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:57:22 +0200 Message-ID: <20080720225722.GC5950@leksak.fem-net> References: <200807080227.43515.jnareb@gmail.com> <200807210029.31543.jnareb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Sam Vilain , Joshua Roys , Sverre Rabbelier , Sverre Rabbelier , David Symonds , Lea Wiemann , John Hawley , Marek Zawirski , "Shawn O. Pearce" , Miklos Vajna , Johannes Schindelin , Christian Couder , Daniel Barkalow To: Jakub Narebski X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 21 00:58:29 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KKhrH-0002Jj-B6 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:58:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752943AbYGTW52 (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:57:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752218AbYGTW52 (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:57:28 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:44341 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752183AbYGTW52 (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:57:28 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 20 Jul 2008 22:57:26 -0000 Received: from q137.fem.tu-ilmenau.de (EHLO leksak.fem-net) [141.24.46.137] by mail.gmx.net (mp032) with SMTP; 21 Jul 2008 00:57:26 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1499303 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/AHbJPLRHA0RG3qEhfE7GODXiFUwD3QGcgcooSX+ drVh35Z414DFGL Received: from sbeyer by leksak.fem-net with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KKhqE-0004Ly-NZ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:57:22 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200807210029.31543.jnareb@gmail.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.64 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, what you write is quite detailed :) Jakub Narebski wrote: > 6. git-sequencer > [...] > There were some problems with sequencer based implementation of > "git am --rebasing", or sequencer based patch application driven > ordinary rebase, but I think there were resolved. They were resolved, but there is a new problem that occured in the am --abort thread of Junio: the sequencer-based git-am does not work on dirty working tree. I've also fixed some other minor issues and have not yet sent this to the list (because I think I stumble over even more while writing the builtin-sequencer.) > Stephen have started the builtin sequencer (but till now no patches > were sent to list: seems to be work in progress). Right. > Some performance benchmarks: > * applying 45 patches with git-am > - 3 seconds using the original > - 8 seconds using the (scripted) sequencer-based one > * rebasing 100 commits > - 4.8 seconds using the original > - 10.1 seconds using the (scripted) sequencer-based one > - 1.7 seconds using builtin sequencer :) I think I'm going to format-patch the same 100 test commits and then I change the "applying 45 patches with git-am" part on the Wiki. Regards. -- Stephan Beyer , PGP 0x6EDDD207FCC5040F