From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [217.216.95.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76D983ED5D0 for ; Fri, 8 May 2026 14:15:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.216.95.84 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778249709; cv=none; b=LA5bjACJvSmZOVa2Qe+dAhgSlDxpfXM0ECZKbPYsg6NxSL3b2LSOAorRHI0+2G8cE54EmPrS57sdcd5at7DoriOUbwwgNBS3CGyqGjZX5O22+Ihp/suX3qFB4SNQ6BvzE2SVkVn/Q6P8gsAddRuNwD7fcnd82YCUC6u0fs+a008= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778249709; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xX0VZ23+Km360Zb7ipm0EKbcR9kAGYg7Z0WNlg5vl8s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=vF4wKk7KmV/SXLMZwWR1xDMFjVkO8Dc5S+PxUr+MeaoaXU2eTmMDDPQctz3MRANmskVEKlccjYinIK+SCVPGEhCHG9rnH2fVcgGYuQzzcoY0wcMqYKQ7FkgQTk4Kvr4/53u10vCdnsvl9/HQWHMJGxNLHfb4vp3a7wY+DsSRm0c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=peff.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=peff.net header.i=@peff.net header.b=QFUW8n8p; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.216.95.84 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=peff.net header.i=@peff.net header.b="QFUW8n8p" Received: (qmail 63121 invoked by uid 106); 8 May 2026 14:15:06 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=peff.net; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=20240930; bh=xX0VZ23+Km360Zb7ipm0EKbcR9kAGYg7Z0WNlg5vl8s=; b=QFUW8n8pyClquGQuqKrR8HQUFbAGwM5m2+HtX+JMFnSINqT1CW6BmXveA4McwJC1aVQZfOCEUGhVzULpSfP3gMD5VzdlLVqMIMAUZPnKUlIgtOqaONg2Yj4zEWyF0jd5MsyE9IY8Dc9UHwJssarVLDQQ3QgfW6gvMJGQhWLnYbkMdyHfrdT3fEpYR0WXwWwL8HdtPeamfHc/WEOHgFcJaHSvObx3ALwegB2ySFNCNOBkrDLhs+uGdbtryeUij3Fo4zaEWoWBLKwkVWvgT+Q3Pxre/WWXc4vcc0LSPY8jxcAfjyg3tOx+1VoH111/5bpGPy9qJwW859vjpuKRH62+Xw== Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 May 2026 14:15:06 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 123799 invoked by uid 111); 8 May 2026 14:15:04 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 08 May 2026 10:15:04 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Fri, 8 May 2026 10:15:04 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Patrick Steinhardt , Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] mingw: stop using nedmalloc Message-ID: <20260508141504.GC709299@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 11:56:19AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" > writes: > > > The patches that remove the vendored sources have a slightly unusual shape: > > the Git mailing list rejects messages over 100kB and > > compat/nedmalloc/malloc.c.h alone is ~196kB of source, so the deletion of > > that file is split at section boundaries into three commits, each > > comfortably under the cap. > > The history made strange only by the limitation of the tool (i.e., > mailing list) we use is like the tail wagging the dog. Could you > give a commit log message that describes droppage of everything done > in the "artificially stepwise only due to mailing list limitation, > but we wish we could do in a single step because the separation is > not logical at all" in the later steps, to the first of such steps > ([2/6], I presume), and give each remaining patch a single liner "to > be squashed into [2/6]" log message, or something? Then I can > squash them on my end. Alternatively for this one only after we get > favourable reviews on the early two steps to drop the use of the > library, I can pull a single "discard everything" patch that builds > on these two from your repository. Could this be a good time to use --irreversible-delete? It is not like humans are going to read the 200k of deletion hunks anyway. -Peff