git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Matthieu Moy" <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>,
	"Michał Kiedrowicz" <michal.kiedrowicz@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:58:24 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7va9ramxlr.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130211190629.GC2270@serenity.lan> (John Keeping's message of "Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:06:29 +0000")

John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> writes:

> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 08:42:21AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> writes:
>> 
>> > Perhaps it's best to leave the patch as it originally was to guarantee
>> > that we can't get stuck in graph_show_commit(), even when it's called at
>> > an unexpected time, but I see you've already squashed this change in.
>> >
>> > Would you prefer me to resend the original patch or send an update with
>> > this change and the above reasoning in the commit message?
>> 
>> Yes, please.  Let's have the original (I think I have it in my
>> reflog so no need to resend it) and this update on top as a separate
>> patch with an updated log message.
>
> I was suggesting dropping the change to remove the
> graph_is_commit_finished() check in the loop.  I'm not sure it buys us
> much and there are still situations that could result in the state
> changing to PADDING during the loop if the graph API is used in an
> unexpected way.

OK, so the fixup! was not done with enough thought.  I am fine with
dropping it.

Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-11 19:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-09 23:39 What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2013, #04; Sat, 9) Junio C Hamano
2013-02-10 13:16 ` [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents John Keeping
2013-02-10 19:30   ` Junio C Hamano
2013-02-10 21:02     ` John Keeping
2013-02-10 22:38       ` Junio C Hamano
2013-02-11 10:54         ` John Keeping
2013-02-11 16:42           ` Junio C Hamano
2013-02-11 19:06             ` John Keeping
2013-02-11 19:58               ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2013-02-11  9:14 ` What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2013, #04; Sat, 9) Matthieu Moy
2013-02-11 16:01   ` Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7va9ramxlr.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=john@keeping.me.uk \
    --cc=michal.kiedrowicz@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).