From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: auto-merge after push? Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:54:30 +0300 Message-ID: <20090715145430.GB9075@redhat.com> References: <20090511142326.GA18260@redhat.com> <20090511201705.GA21045@redhat.com> <20090611104020.GA12036@redhat.com> <20090711203831.GA10875@redhat.com> <7vocrplhbv.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 15 16:55:41 2009 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 1MR5tQ-0001iw-Mf for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:55:37 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755022AbZGOOzZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jul 2009 10:55:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754826AbZGOOzZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jul 2009 10:55:25 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:39304 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754784AbZGOOzY (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jul 2009 10:55:24 -0400 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n6FEtHo8010053; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 10:55:19 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n6FEtG09022080; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 10:55:16 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (vpn-10-95.str.redhat.com [10.32.10.95]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n6FEtD3m029032; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 10:55:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vocrplhbv.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.58 on 172.16.27.26 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 02:30:44PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > Well, I use it myself, what more can I say? > > It's rather hard to justify a feature that is available to the general > public with documentation that only says "we tell you what happens in > terms of low-level commands when you use this feature, we warn you that > this has its own set of possible complications, but we do not specify what > they are, nor how to recover from them. You should know what you are doing > if you choose to use it". > > That is not very helpful. > > If this _were_ implemented as a sample hook on the receiving end, with > ample comments that the users can read to undersand the issues before > deciding to install it on their repositories, it might have been an easier > sell. > > If Dscho is short on time, perhaps somebody else can improve upon the > documentation part of the patch? It's a long time ago that I took a look > at the patch text itself but I had a recorrection that the code itself was > reasonable (and it is a well known fact that I tend not to notice bugs in > Dscho's code so it is not a very useful thing for me to go back to look at > the code again now when I am short on brain cycles). > So, let me summarize the issues: - if the tree is pushed into while files are being actively read (e.g. built from), the build will get an inconsistent state - even worse if one of the files is open for editing or is being written into: the file will get corrupted - if there are uncommitted changes in the tree, the push is denied Are there others? -- MST