From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2009, #07; Sun, 29) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:34:32 -0800 Message-ID: <7vfx7wxy7r.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7vocmlbq8d.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Junio C Hamano To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 30 08:34:45 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NF0mS-0002n6-Vy for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 08:34:45 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753917AbZK3Hed (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:34:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753841AbZK3Hec (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:34:32 -0500 Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:43645 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753815AbZK3Hec (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:34:32 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1875F140D; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:34:38 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=JKbxXVijzEgY168cC2XWuyNUk5w=; b=c98Zci cVp2ALqxh+QPZWTBBWeRyIVcNQdSCXOEBn/JkJX+6sksYiaDtklEN/SBvGJfk2pZ +bZSf4HZbBo8lFtzykLfFPYhEdclTGkKKCmZO1zE38q9vt+NJOALyxhv1HL0lMbp 0dTIS/2KFAJCU+DUFgiMlkzMfawtYx2XNSdgs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=dxz4Ks2cZjsFUf/Hlox+npK8o6EwI7Ym R0RktBS8xa82F1FV736v7PeJfdqSZg0Dv+3uNmnOmWBWoCDMoPWRBGAMGqJRXlLE G8bfYPnX0jamlFGZv6vU6H80qDlZd0Qfjm+/EBRIiLrEyAnuW42+QjSeJN2Dm5YH C5hzV2g8hbg= Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06A88140B; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:34:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 459FC140A; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:34:34 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <7vocmlbq8d.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Sun\, 29 Nov 2009 02\:05\:38 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: CFD36C00-DD82-11DE-979A-9F3FEE7EF46B-77302942!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano writes: > This will be the last update before deciding what should go in 1.6.6-rc1 > and describes my current thinking. I do not want to decide unilaterally what will be in and what will be left out of 1.6.6, so here is a seocnd call for comments. I said "Perhaps merge it to 'master' before 1.6.6-rc1?" for these: > * uk/maint-shortlog-encoding (2009-11-25) 1 commit. > * fc/send-email-envelope (2009-11-26) 2 commits. > * jc/mailinfo-remove-brackets (2009-07-15) 1 commit. > * tr/reset-checkout-patch (2009-11-19) 1 commit. > * em/commit-claim (2009-11-04) 1 commit > * cc/bisect-doc (2009-11-08) 1 commit > * jc/pretty-lf (2009-10-04) 1 commit. > * ns/send-email-no-chain-reply-to (2009-11-29) 1 commit I didn't say so in the message but I think this is Ok for 1.6.6-rc1. > * bw/diff-color-hunk-header (2009-11-27) 2 commits I would love to see necessary fix-ups to make them suitable and include in the 1.6.6 final for these: > * jn/gitweb-blame (2009-11-24) 8 commits. I am inclined to keep the rest out of 1.6.6. Even though I did it myself, I am ambivalent about the diff.bwoutputonly anti-procrastination measure. The send-email one looked fine and is a welcome addition to the "don't surprise users" effort to prepare for 1.7.0, and diff.bwoutputonly is in a sense in a similar spirit, but an option to keep an old and broken semantics feels somewhat wrong. Also anybody has comments on the part for preparing users for 1.7.0 in the draft release notes?