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=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 8455E20966 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 19:19:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934538AbdC3TTE (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:19:04 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:63659 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934299AbdC3TTD (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:19:03 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8729A6D271; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:19:01 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=mz5WG+KKHSRbXk+ORmJOMcr6Xqc=; b=JmJSNm x8W1bRE9rIwI04JYOzAuZkBmd/a+TY6MpHaA6JDUH6oromi6JEwdq20UDjMNoKz/ x2ztxDsxtplrFS93Zt/MqyoX9Jq6vSYPffs9y1A3ab6z6+xtu6ooulMMsDzyuhHv MyVEeLRe0pNooZr15gKzOUh6YQFJNrZIx+63I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=et1lgOCy7E3toIQIR+bwTEfZQKlypoc9 acTB5THjDByyaWA4OQ5+O0vacITLWBnji/8y1hqDye49u1RaAcnwh0SICL+ZT+Fq x1nz8wl9sRpGkJM0QIszWKhlRwTwL8OW67uH00DPA+ZU2mT8IPLpdF24XmU1TNAG wa/BzQ65l/0= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688BD6D270; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:19:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B97F6D26C; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:19:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Jonathan Nieder , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] should these two topics graduate to 'master' soon? References: <20170328185149.GS31294@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> <20170328191911.22wxjbukv47jflgl@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:18:59 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20170328191911.22wxjbukv47jflgl@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:19:11 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BA7394C6-157D-11E7-82C7-97B1B46B9B0B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:51:49AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >> > * jc/merge-drop-old-syntax (2015-04-29) 1 commit >> > >> > This topic stops "git merge HEAD " syntax that >> > has been deprecated since October 2007 (and we have issued a >> > warning message since around v2.5.0 when the ancient syntax was >> > used). >> > >> > * jk/no-looking-at-dotgit-outside-repo-final (2016-10-26) 1 commit >> > >> > This is the endgame of the topic to avoid blindly falling back to >> > ".git" when the setup sequence said we are _not_ in Git repository. >> > A corner case that happens to work right now may be broken by a call >> > to die("BUG"). >> > >> > I am leaning toward including the former in the upcoming release, >> > whose -rc0 is tentatively scheduled to happen on Apr 20th. I think >> > the rest of the system is also ready for the latter (back when we >> > merged it to 'next' and started cooking, there were still a few >> > codepaths that triggered its die(), which have been fixed). >> > >> > Opinions? >> >> Google has been running with both of these for a while. Any problems >> we ran into were already reported and fixed. I would be all for >> including them in the next release. > > Thanks, I was wondering how much exposure the latter got. It might be a > good idea to merge it to "master" early in the post-2.13 cycle to get a > little more exposure (since the point of it is really to flush out > unusual cases, the more people run it before we make a release the > better). But I'm also OK if it's merged to master this cycle, as long as > it's soon-ish. It's much better to flush out problems in pre-release > master than in a released version. OK, let's do both during this cycle, before I take a short break at the beginning of next month. Thanks.