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 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 B6DFBC433EF for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 16:12:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CB456113E for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 16:12:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1346386AbhIHQNI (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2021 12:13:08 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:53286 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230091AbhIHQNI (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2021 12:13:08 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8F14ECEDD; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 12:11:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=4MiKG3B4FOmq3GZxUvjxsHGTke50v1n8QUe6qe 4HHcs=; b=aJ2fYXkKsxnwiO/dSfz/N3Jw9Fk2EuNtteEeWBzwqSkzjUDXAqxQ5+ cfikMwZ+s8VbtMoCy6kBNdnZ9sFPk0Mi1FI8f4HtAjb9L+txFJtRbNolkXZwtEGT 3hyp5DIyUaNngldqil0ZKoBKhqNfv2pJA2yjF2qFUC2OcoG9RIcec= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0428ECEDC; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 12:11:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.196.172.107]) (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 6B54EECEDB; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 12:11:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: SZEDER =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= , Derrick Stolee , Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, newren@gmail.com, matheus.bernardino@usp.br, Johannes Schindelin , Eric Sunshine , =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Scharfe Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] Sparse index: delete ignored files outside sparse cone References: <4a0125d2-67d9-b533-4f8b-618c3de3b411@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2021 09:11:58 -0700 In-Reply-To: <4a0125d2-67d9-b533-4f8b-618c3de3b411@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee's message of "Wed, 8 Sep 2021 07:39:54 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7ED90D46-10BF-11EC-9EC0-62A2C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Derrick Stolee writes: >> I rebased the dependent topic myself, but I would not be surprised >> if I weren't careful enough and introduced a new bug. Please double >> check when a new 'seen' is pushed out in several hours. > > Did you have any conflicts? I don't think this version changed any > of the textual dependencies. Anyway, the test suite passes with > GIT_TEST_SPARSE_INDEX=1 on my machine at 'seen' (except for an issue > with t7900-maintenance.sh that is unrelated). There was a bit of test refactoring in the other topic, so I initially punted but then I found a bit of energy to look at the conflict and realize it was not all that bad.