Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> Yeah, I'm fine with a straight revert, too (I think it is fine to keep >>> in master, though). I think jk/alloc-commit-id is built right on top of >>> the original commit-slab topic, so it should be easy to do either way. >>> >>> Thanks for dealing with it. >> >> Whatever we do, perhaps it is worth applying the test below on top? > > Yeah, thanks. I think that is a good idea. I was preparing a patch > to tuck your minimum reproduction at the end of 4202, but your version > and placement makes good sense. OK, I pushed out updated 'maint' and 'master'. The former merges a rebased version of jk/alloc-commit-id in to make the "reorganize the way we manage the in-core commit data" topic, and the latter reverts the "Use SSE to micro-optimize a leaf function to check the format of a ref string". Please give them some quick sanity check. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html