From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2010, #08; Sun, 24) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 01:59:07 +0100 Message-ID: <201001260159.09286.jnareb@gmail.com> References: <7vfx5u6bn9.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <201001260107.25796.jnareb@gmail.com> <4B5E357A.50607@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Petr Baudis , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, "J.H." To: "J.H." X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 26 01:59:26 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NZZm6-0002D4-Ja for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 01:59:22 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752216Ab0AZA7R (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:59:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751761Ab0AZA7R (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:59:17 -0500 Received: from mail-fx0-f220.google.com ([209.85.220.220]:54444 "EHLO mail-fx0-f220.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750926Ab0AZA7Q (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:59:16 -0500 Received: by fxm20 with SMTP id 20so4232102fxm.21 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:59:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; bh=ZZRMyKrfdI1uLxwGyRnQDzI5/SDNiK296Sow4qoUZw4=; b=bjG6ETi6xWhMYRiH6jzlHS/pAgghkYho9us0eCxzOzNCAPk1V24au8oFl9U3XTaOb2 SWH7yBPPEPzBQ0djB/1cnusbzkS+/UbS4nEl9l//avqPDIL3mv8nE2R7yJ+cp2V2U6HH Ynl5KMuHl/Tg/1S40MT+TLUY7ePBl0jc1PU2I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:message-id; b=VeVy4zijg67lmVePKvAu4FNGazuhgvONFHvWnYrVMI7psO5QLLH5BSyVMftKHmJ3Jk StPAUvMk+Sw5a8Mo2pewpS9o+rQGfqtOf1cA35F5QWpoS9RD+NomR6LlCQ9J5z7IgkDI WM2iyh0Q0mlwn7SG9o3kSw8gOIVRvKSB3EAzc= Received: by 10.103.122.22 with SMTP id z22mr3728506mum.68.1264467554822; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:59:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.13? (abvr10.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.8.215.10]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j10sm1020030mue.30.2010.01.25.16.59.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:59:13 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 In-Reply-To: <4B5E357A.50607@kernel.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 at 16:21:51 -0800 (PST), J.H. wrote: > > > > I am waiting for response from (I guess busy) J.H.; I can do the re-roll > > if he is too busy to work on it. > > I'm juggling about 4 things in the air right now, with gitweb being one > of them, and two of them involving external entities to kernel.org. > It's good news all told, just requires a fair amount of my time > (currently) and babysitting. I've been digging through the patches > you've got right now. I should really just pull them in from your git > tree again. Note however that my series (gitweb/cache-kernel branch) is based on gitweb-ml-v2, not on newer gitweb-ml-v5. > After reading through some of the discussions today I've had some more > ideas on the caching stuff, they are written up on my whiteboard and I > might be able to get to shortly, but I've got a rather large wall > looming ahead of me that's going to chew up a *LOT* (read at least a > month, if not two) of my time, so I'm a bit under the gun to try and get > this as far as I can before I hit that wall or this is going to fall by > the wayside again till I've got time again. I think the best way of utilizing your time would be for you to take active part in discussion, especially in what git.kernel.org needs and why. I can clean up the miscellaneous improvements parts myself, and re-roll caching patches. > > > For the main caching patch, it seems like good idea to take Jakub's > > > split-up series instead, let's see what is J.H.'s opinion on the series? > > > > > > > Let me at least make them into proper patches, with commit messages and > > configureability at least of the original caching patch by J.H. > > > > Also the question whether to create 'print -> print $out' patch, or to > > manipulate *STDOUT instead must be solved, I think, before applying > > those patches... well, at least beyond 'pu'. > > > > I am waiting for promised J.H. comments, when he will have time for it... -- Jakub Narebski Poland