From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 923CB207EC for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:35:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753846AbcJELfK (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2016 07:35:10 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:64726 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751121AbcJELfJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2016 07:35:09 -0400 Received: from virtualbox ([37.24.142.40]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LrNoG-1at14d0vXA-0134fU; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 13:35:03 +0200 Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 13:35:01 +0200 (CEST) From: Johannes Schindelin X-X-Sender: virtualbox@virtualbox To: Junio C Hamano cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Pull out require_clean_work_tree() functionality from builtin/pull.c In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:rWGHIjwHNS1CtLZ0iu+LTQ2sXCuBU8tnkHzqQbTtIrSJ0hko9u+ GxdxvrX1ijcWytfnVDKGYkgHSrOePuvFi3RPZx5R5kEjDWzIpe8fMyiNwujAztR/lSz2724 5H+zz4nLOfGZAK3D6Jj5+5AIqPH9Q7kw/r8ZlVaDWlAg7uZpLgZrutCR8BUvlUG//asN5ff pJ4MGphHUzK+eLYf9EUpw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:a9VnE39568E=:By6JKupe+Fef33JWKWuJZF o13Ozj6i0Gcp9w9QEVS36Nn1yYnoSiEHrbDrlzHsvvYE7tcVI1KaDagm27NVewY/JrKg+na7G 8QhRzdB7mSxRC1kG8P5CF+VwdCgDw4fsBMcaUsWjZZmF5cJfOoKrENU38wUDbiOhoLJ4GiDvn Ezykdz3Sf1SnI3/A5SQJJsdw7ZACN75jrap191BXPu6PDjutDLLqulUKygSDD/AEmVGCUloNp Ku+6rlAJ3793cvbNfy6FKCDeFDLEwaJjGo9ya5vJ1D96+EHczD6cjJD8i1y6FrB7hKwaGN8Ar 7GVhwI+TMdpPb8gdXmrr9RbVun13aOdwopTdzwfEwrcGA6U8tpXamg/yCenEhMnjnU+WGdJpX nV1+8GmyJTNuXkJW6AEY0rZecEnu8H88ca5Y7yn7nRtfsOppjx/lHE2rOLtu+8eB2xDJs64bH OuHUBSw9K4kkk+9PbrKXSDz4Q06FiilOkQYHQzO5vzeLSYAizGhVgOEf9YqHmttwR3reOHuR2 Qdz0WuMGdlpN+k2HuHzV3WH0TzXUafN6WXDhvh3DfeUo66FDqLxKIDY4h4/D5NHxoOiUozd6e GTmA3y3/s2XbhIeVUMBkC051VOC7iQwqNAqktbQjLc5wPHmeq4wWgsNQ3a7H/ImlySrcEj1zF hrNPp0/vPUHX/5ccbcd6sAnHPhyNCiHsmO/dBB34ZWnJpji1txd/ES5D0DBkj7DEieyKhOCom 86ii68Ek3gioKWJ/QhUKk6Wyrmaibe43RmlSCDXjcubKwySNG2MrxIduoaHAA0ax4I/CgsO0A Ekatfd0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Junio, On Tue, 4 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > This is the 5th last patch series of my work to accelerate interactive > > rebases in particular on Windows. > > Offtopic, but I am always confused by what you might mean by this > "nth last patch series". Is this series 5th from the last and we > have four more to go? Yes, we have four more to go: - the patch series (called "prepare-sequencer" in my fork) preparing the sequencer code for the next patch series, such as revamping the parser for the edit script (or "todo script" as I used to say all the time, or "insn sheet" as sequencer calls it), - the patch series ("sequencer-i") teaching the sequencer to parse and execute the commands of rebase -i's git-rebase-todo file, - the patch series ("rebase--helper") introducing the builtin, and using it from rebase -i, and finally - the patch series ("rebase-i-extra") that moves more performance critical bits and pieces from git-rebase--interactive.sh into the rebase--helper. I had originally planned to stop at rebase--helper and invite other developers to join the fun of making rebase -i a true builtin, but the performance improvement was surprisingly disappointing before the rebase--helper learned to skip unnecessary picks, to verify that the script is valid, to expand/collapse the SHA-1s, and to rearrange fixup!/squash! lines. > In any case, after a quick re-read and comparison with the last > round, I think this is in a good shape. I'd say that we would wait > for a few days for others to comment and then merge it to 'next' if > we missed nothing glaringly wrong. Perfect! Dscho