From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2010, #01; Tue, 9) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:21:11 -0800 Message-ID: <7vsjz7hj3s.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7vbp5ymfyo.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Jakub Narebski X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Nov 11 18:21:25 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PGapx-0001h9-7R for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 18:21:25 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754844Ab0KKRVT (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:21:19 -0500 Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:56368 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754405Ab0KKRVS (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:21:18 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49F8F324F; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:21:22 -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=4ncGG4lazpOlpw9YdS4RV4ptnYc=; b=vfL7/B a3L5kouvby8htEh9HoAb4u9nociFNd3LIgTBf64vHS+bNfRn3o0V41VpHeOpbJXx ruJf9Qiaw/ns57euFuF5jXfGSDt10f5F3sri5UDsk6L6Cyu1QfzIX1pxBurhY5CH cRWNFnz8Md2TAEJ6R3NSrHy9iNk0mbLlCpRgk= 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=aR+BIBz6aVaGrta/VrKdZB5ydpVS480A 61TrsjAXKmiU4PnUeQElAWtanl8go+C/MsoiNx4eKBG+9ODs031mGf4B+xtrH5pK wzv9+VtjPG+t8uu+1r8PCXZAtgsGJu/Ms4OuXMSQXd3UDSyx8IcAsYdU++O4F45A ohZ55UZQ44w= Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F203324C; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:21:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2FB543248; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:21:16 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Jakub Narebski's message of "Tue\, 09 Nov 2010 13\:38\:49 -0800 \(PST\)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 196EB5D6-EDB8-11DF-B814-B53272ABC92C-77302942!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jakub Narebski writes: > Junio C Hamano writes: > ... >> * jh/gitweb-caching (2010-11-01) 4 commits >> - gitweb: Minimal testing of gitweb caching >> - gitweb: File based caching layer (from git.kernel.org) >> - gitweb: add output buffering and associated functions >> - gitweb: Prepare for splitting gitweb >> (this branch uses jn/gitweb-test.) > >> * jn/gitweb-test (2010-09-26) 4 commits >> (merged to 'next' on 2010-11-05 at 90b3adf) >> + gitweb/Makefile: Include gitweb/config.mak >> + gitweb/Makefile: Add 'test' and 'test-installed' targets >> + t/gitweb-lib.sh: Add support for GITWEB_TEST_INSTALLED >> + gitweb: Move call to evaluate_git_version after evaluate_gitweb_config >> (this branch is used by jh/gitweb-caching.) > > These two branches have simple to resolve but non-trivial conflict. > Should I rebase 'jh/gitweb-caching' on top of 'jn/gitweb-test' then, > resolving this conflict? In general, when a conflict between topic A and B is simple to resolve (and I have the correct resolution already in 'pu'), I'd rather prefer to keep topic A independent of topic B than rebasing topic A on top of topic B, unless topic A is far from ready and topic B is truly ready and about to graduate, so that we can leave a door open for A to graduate before B does (or vice versa). In this case, I think it is overdue (iow, sorry I've been slow) for the gitweb-test topic to graduate, so the separation does not really matter. > BTW. this would allow me to improve 'gitweb: Minimal testing of gitweb > caching'. Then I probably should leave gitweb-caching out of 'next' when gitweb-test graduates to master so that you can refresh the caching series. Thanks for a heads-up.