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=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE 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 C8DE81F4BD for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 20:10:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726887AbfJBUKl (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Oct 2019 16:10:41 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:62382 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726411AbfJBUKk (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Oct 2019 16:10:40 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7B1B82073; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 16:10:38 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) 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=BX1rfwsd/0y7YHlx2ExODtaLm6w=; b=CJ2Pkz q7aLBf1Hzj/EpJ/wrrodXyH8NkE+qV7EAlIOm79tjW90GgNWFYiDlvw5WQFErMro XxSzRH9W2HjvAg6Xz8CfhHr/+UMsU/ArGOn2SxyQdeuYOt6RgxQHTKbIld3D/bsR b3mLBrW9mo75R6tPRNC2WDDJzAPDbWjhdr6MM= 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=cA4urMhvr4JN1IN+4wi5rV44qM6Rjp8f XerVtm1LE3AFZB3GdBgG7RyoyEAIHjwT+l5K+2OiUYyrMmBUcGfES/D2fkRlHCkk Yd1LmpsJd7ouqO/5JenD4t5aGBbtj8R0PIHEr8tiMQ8R6CWQrFxcmk014Rrh7kND ScPQMS0RbUU= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 980DB82072; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 16:10:38 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BCF7D82070; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 16:10:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Elijah Newren Cc: Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] fast export/import: handle nested tags, improve incremental exports References: <20190925014005.17056-1-newren@gmail.com> <20190930211018.23633-1-newren@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2019 05:10:33 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Elijah Newren's message of "Wed, 2 Oct 2019 08:54:02 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B1FE6D8E-E550-11E9-AF55-8D86F504CC47-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Elijah Newren writes: > I see you picked up this corrected series in pu; thanks. However, > your merge commit, 2a99d6b6ff7c ("Merge branch > 'en/fast-imexport-nested-tags' into pu", 2019-10-02), claims "Seems to > break t9300 when merged to 'pu'.". I know v1 did that and I could > reproduce, but I can't reproduce any failures here. Was this message > just left over or is there some problem you are seeing? I thought that the latest What's cooking written after you sent the corrected version hasn't been sent yet. And the draft copy I locally have for the next issue of what's cooking has the comment removed already. Anything I missed?