From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 575DAC433E6 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 20:44:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B8BC206D4 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 20:44:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731270AbhAZFFS (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2021 00:05:18 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:61261 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726920AbhAZCh1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2021 21:37:27 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFFA3A5381; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 21:36:44 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=sasl; bh=YgOMORdCFtivDFstYsH3rrCgPlM=; b=ku2lrdqsHHan90DDo4Cx 62QG0IvWp6ekKIC8/9i3V3KTwBBBtoD2g9n2yf6IafqWXYKMZs8A+wX+CfZMXJwm ngy0kKTHr/OZVL9oFmEac3SaQQkltQRmfi9Y/fuiIfi6/y0VkmeAWoVh+8bxUBXb HlV8uPLJuxc8+GqVONfYuaM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=cyxfaXgttSXPwPYJbZjyrvHxx0t01p7NVhbiXcDOvDLNYE Q+ST9lszHQ+OhDdW44BdtTSU8rK71tNWV1YrbOIrKOCZAps52zLhc8fEP5NwBWMA KGh4dODXQ5iCwqa2eXX8hIINU1v4/NHJw3WJu9ycX6T81Flq9IfCI9y1jl9Uk= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8AF2A5380; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 21:36:44 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D868A537E; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 21:36:44 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Taylor Blau Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, dstolee@microsoft.com, jrnieder@gmail.com, peff@peff.net Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/10] pack-revindex: introduce on-disk '.rev' format References: X-Gnus-Delayed: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 02:30:40 -0800 Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 18:36:43 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 54555076-5F7F-11EB-982C-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Taylor Blau writes: > Here is a third reroll of my series to introduce an on-disk format for the > reverse index. Since the first series (to introduce a new API) has been merged > to 'next', this series has been rebased onto 'next', too. Ehh, does that mean you are OK to see the remainder of 'next' to take this topic hostage? Unless you use some new features that came from other topics in 'next', I'd discourage such a rebasing. If the API topic gained some fix-up patches on top since it was merged to 'next', it is perfectly sensible to rebase this series on top of the updated API topic---it does not change the fact that this topic is dependent on the API topic. As it happens that the API topic is now in 'master', none of the above complaint should actually apply, even if this new round of patches do not cleanly apply to the tip of the API topic, as long as they apply cleanly to tonight's 'master'. It will make the topic ineligible to be merged later to 'maint', but this is a new feature, so nothing is lost. So, I'll try to apply them first on top of the tip of the API topic, which is at 779412b9 (for_each_object_in_pack(): clarify pack vs index ordering, 2021-01-14), and if I do not feel like spending time to resolve conflicts, I'll then try to apply them on top of tonight's master. We'll see what happens. Thanks.