From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74FD71F453 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 18:35:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726898AbfAQSfq (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jan 2019 13:35:46 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com ([209.85.128.66]:50305 "EHLO mail-wm1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726099AbfAQSfp (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jan 2019 13:35:45 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f66.google.com with SMTP id n190so2154944wmd.0 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 10:35:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=nyHiNd/RPJ+2/0NiAbZfiF4HWk/txXxfG/bNi1QCLmg=; b=Vb2ZBjjN2zzADhrxYAnRGUq90EMse8PK9b878jWwHcQJIJFcCnJblJFKU7fOYhZWO5 d/8ahvyCRmwBgdeOKz+wwonCE8KZy/zQzqVoi56ZAh4jgxWmiO6SOgxJ1RXYecjDgjxE 6iQmSu7Mrss2qTsqAkdImpC/B3SoRJFlzGEwbpWIC5St9Kkh6c/Zfa1yncbpZUEkt8pk 3JqRoE5O7NPZ2sx5PB3ie+n8WONkhbRGyRQLsVVg61qkSz41dR5ThLEtToscXBOC5eoT F7f3Medc3pWIoj/NNOfUhfDTDMUeUp1Ws/p3370O50h4aCc50+t65jK7OpaGBrZ/R+9l wOEA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=nyHiNd/RPJ+2/0NiAbZfiF4HWk/txXxfG/bNi1QCLmg=; b=onrr/2m+QVybwrB2ZGoP7/oXr8LJwIOXeO+8oaMHv6DAa6Z/dQ07nasoSNPp/oVZ/l eB2uWCoOCCmVpyIXHc6CJeqsMQE6uy/nfpxojdsG3DoHnBIoZZ+DQhJF39NnSqEg/lzt OvQS+mdgyYCJ14E7RPkBdavy2+ZFsdZz3wMz1VwuRnK5Vp9a5LkpEavjAAgZSNVZ3ynr XqmPztIrk+Np933VI98wDBp8/myvO3Ag6uthEWYW0a/7db0vxvU+EYWtNNfyKzasDVud nUlDnkHII83e+yNUoJQ+kbcCBe3Po9c5IQTyHdSbWbN+iyrbvZR+WbGdT8hPS3q3efc1 LglQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukfSI6ZdbT8ZurYnDqTvGUBs8vz3aOJOmwb0U7EK+NXxCWkW3g7b D7mMavsX1SGacuIYr1T7nrC/om8i X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN70KMVrb9JShQHxQiTSQsarsLsVmG7s/jHdnE2/nar1kj5iwd1YWHCMps2UEryNtXeKMvVPXw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:180a:: with SMTP id 10mr12777298wmy.92.1547750143389; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 10:35:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (112.68.155.104.bc.googleusercontent.com. [104.155.68.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k19sm123567108wre.5.2019.01.17.10.35.42 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 17 Jan 2019 10:35:42 -0800 (PST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Thomas Gummerer Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2019, #02; Tue, 15) References: <20190116212631.GK25639@hank.intra.tgummerer.com> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 10:35:42 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20190116212631.GK25639@hank.intra.tgummerer.com> (Thomas Gummerer's message of "Wed, 16 Jan 2019 21:26:31 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Thomas Gummerer writes: > On 01/15, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> * ps/stash-in-c (2019-01-04) 27 commits >> - tests: add a special setup where stash.useBuiltin is off >> - stash: optionally use the scripted version again >> - stash: add back the original, scripted `git stash` >> - stash: convert `stash--helper.c` into `stash.c` >> ... >> - sha1-name.c: add `get_oidf()` which acts like `get_oid()` >> - Merge branch 'sd/stash-wo-user-name' >> >> "git stash" rewritten in C. >> >> Comments? > > I read over the series last weekend. I had some small comments on > 21/26 and 25/26. I forgot to reply with my overall assessment on the > thread though. I'd be happy to give my Reviewed-by for the whole > series with or without the changes I suggested. I double-checked the > re-introduced "legacy" stash script to make sure it is actually the > same as it is on master. Thanks for helping. And thanks for reminding us about the late addition of the legacy stuff, which makes the progression of the series less than ideal, but the benefit that would come from a possible reroll to start the series from the last three patches would be fairly limited anyway. Such a reorganized series would have allowed investigation of regressions and bugs during the development comparing the original and rewritten implementations slightly easier, but experience from seeing the evolution of these "reimplement in C" topics tells us that we see major part of the regression fallouts after the series is declared "feature complete", so in the long run, the less-than-ideal organization of the topic does not matter much in practice. > So I'd be happy to get this merged into 'next', and if anything comes > up to fix that on top. OK.