Re: [PATCH] notes: do not drop notes written by a concurrent process

["Farid Zakaria" <farid.m.zakaria@gmail.com>]

On Fri Oct 30, 2026 at 2:21 AM PDT, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2026, at 21:56, Farid Zakaria wrote:
>> On Thu Oct 29, 2026 at 11:25 AM PDT, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com> writes:
>>>>[snip]
>>>
>>> Or possibly
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>
>> Your proposals for retries when possible make sense but I may leave that
>> to you to implement.
>>
>> I felt confident reviewing the current patch at it's current state
>> (AI-assisted) and I do concur that it's a net-positive change in the
>> interim.
>
> Use of GenAI should be disclosed up front.
> Documentation/SubmittingPatches, [[ai]].
>

Please consider the thread my disclosure.

FWIW I did read https://git-scm.com/docs/SubmittingPatches as of today
and I don't see any specific mention of disclosure. It might be a good
idea to make that explicit.

I see no mention of special trailer or mention to disclosure although it
does mention rejecting anything that looks like "slop" which I hope this
is not -- I went through the patch and the failure.

If I was looking at the wrong document, please point me to the right
one.
>>
>> (I guess I could try to implement the retry logic - AI
>> assisted if you like)
>>
>> Would it be OK if I also suggested the other two bugs (+small fixes)
>> I found on the mailing list (with the same tool)?
>>
>> They are:
>> * Similar race-type bug for credential-cache leaving a stale daemon+credential
>> * fsmonitor daemon keeps running after its worktree is deleted or moved
>>
>> Both patches are of similar size and complexity to this one, with a test
>> case.