From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Hommey Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2016, #04; Tue, 14) Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:16:30 +0900 Message-ID: <20160616041630.GA32045@glandium.org> References: <20160615023658.GA21270@glandium.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jun 16 06:31:28 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 1bDOxh-0005Q1-CC for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 06:31:25 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750984AbcFPEbT (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:31:19 -0400 Received: from [31.55.44.181] ([31.55.44.181]:36568 "EHLO glandium.org" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750898AbcFPEbS (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:31:18 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 885 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:31:18 EDT Received: from glandium by zenigata with local (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1bDOjG-0008PP-Km; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:16:30 +0900 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-GPG-Fingerprint: 182E 161D 1130 B9FC CD7D B167 E42A A04F A6AA 8C72 User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:32:39AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Mike Hommey writes: > > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 03:08:04PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > >> * mh/connect (2016-06-06) 10 commits > >> - connect: [host:port] is legacy for ssh > >> ... > >> - connect: document why we sometimes call get_port after get_host_and_port > >> > >> Ok, folks, is everybody happy with this version? > > > > $gmane/296609 > > $gmane/296610 > > Oh, I have seen these, and I know you two are happy. > > But I am having a hard time coming up with a few-line summary for > this topic. I can write the beginning part, i.e. "Git-URL parsing > routine has been rewritten", but the concluding part of the sentence > cannot be "... has been rewritten for no good reason." if I were to > mark the topic as "Will merge to 'next'". The best I can come up > with is "... has been rewritten (hopefully) without changing the > benaviour.", but that is not a strong-enough justificaiton to make > the change to the codebase, either. > > In short, while the update may not introduce new bugs, why would we > want to have this change in the first place? My original motivation was to avoid having to copy code from connect.c into git-cinnabar, which is what I'm currently doing[1]. Things derailed a little, and we got ourselves somewhat in the middle of a refactor, that I'm willing to push a little further (like, refactor things such that host_end only happens once). My hope is that this makes the code more maintainable. Mike 1. https://github.com/glandium/git-cinnabar/blob/master/connect.c