Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2024, #02; Fri, 1)

["Bence Ferdinandy" <bence@ferdinandy.com>]

On Mon Nov 04, 2024 at 05:05, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Here are the topics that have been cooking in my tree.  Commits
> prefixed with '+' are in 'next' (being in 'next' is a sign that a
> topic is stable enough to be used and are candidate to be in a
> future release).  Commits prefixed with '-' are only in 'seen', and
> aren't considered "accepted" at all and may be annotated with an URL
> to a message that raises issues but they are no means exhaustive.  A
> topic without enough support may be discarded after a long period of
> no activity (of course they can be resubmit when new interests
> arise).
>
> Thanks everybody, especially Taylor, for keeping things going while
> I was away.  Unfortunately, we seem to have acquired way too many
> topics that were posted and picked up without getting reviewed.  As
> we discussed a few months ago in <xmqqployf6z5.fsf@gitster.g>, I'll
> start discarding topics that have seen no activities for 3 or more
> weeks.  Interested parties can of course revive these topics.

[snip]

Considering the above,

> * bf/set-head-symref (2024-10-23) 8 commits
>  - fetch set_head: handle mirrored bare repositories
>  - fetch: set remote/HEAD if it does not exist
>  - refs: add create_only option to refs_update_symref_extended
>  - refs: add TRANSACTION_CREATE_EXISTS error
>  - remote set-head: better output for --auto
>  - remote set-head: refactor for readability
>  - refs: atomically record overwritten ref in update_symref
>  - t/t5505-remote: set default branch to main
>
>  When "git fetch $remote" notices that refs/remotes/$remote/HEAD is
>  missing and discovers what branch the other side points with its
>  HEAD, refs/remotes/$remote/HEAD is updated to point to it.
>
>  Needs review.
>  source: <20241023153736.257733-1-bence@ferdinandy.com>

and that this version of the series has been in for two weeks: is there
something I should/can be doing so as not to hit the 3 week mark?

Most of the patches in the series have been reviewed, some multiple times, but
v9 did have a bit bigger change due to a review suggestion and there have been
two new patches (the first and the last), that were added to fix some issues
(bugs?) uncovered during testing the series that were related to the topic.

Thanks,
Bence