Re: [PATCH 0/4] Multiple worktrees vs. submodules fixes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hmph.  I was hoping that the multiple-work-trees topic was ready for
> 'next' by now, but we may want to wait to see how the interaction
> with submodule plays out to have another chance of a clean reroll
> before it happens.  This is a topic with large impact and is quite
> intrusive code-wise, even though the intrusive parts are cleanly
> done.  So we'd want to take more time to unleash it to the general
> public than more usual small scale topics, anyway.

Originally I wanted to get it merged without submodule support, but I
failed to spot the local_repo_env problem and could have caused a
regression for submodules. So yeah delaying the series does not sound
bad. Not sure about the reroll (i.e. rewriting current patches). I
think putting patches on top with explanation is better. But we can
keep it in 'pu' and see if we really need to reroll.
-- 
Duy
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]