Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 01:59:20PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> -------------------------------------------------- >> [Discarded] >> >> * jk/tag-contains (2014-06-30) 8 commits >> . perf: add tests for tag --contains >> . tag: use commit_contains >> . commit: provide a fast multi-tip contains function >> . string-list: add pos to iterator callback >> . add functions for memory-efficient bitmaps >> . paint_down_to_common: use prio_queue >> . tag: factor out decision to stream tags >> . tag: allow --sort with -n >> >> Expecting a reroll. > > Seems reasonable. I am still planning to re-roll this eventually, but I > do not think there is a deep need to carry it in your tree for the time > being. I started to think about how to consolidate the various "reachable" and "contains" traversal machinery (and that was one reason why I had a small clean-up patches in the merge-base machinery) but haven't managed to allocate enough concentration on the issue (yet). >> * jk/makefile (2014-02-05) 16 commits >> . FIXUP >> . move LESS/LV pager environment to Makefile >> . Makefile: teach scripts to include make variables >> . FIXUP >> . Makefile: auto-build C strings from make variables >> . Makefile: drop *_SQ variables >> . FIXUP >> . Makefile: add c-quote helper function >> . Makefile: introduce sq function for shell-quoting >> . Makefile: always create files via make-var >> . Makefile: store GIT-* sentinel files in MAKE/ >> . Makefile: prefer printf to echo for GIT-* >> . Makefile: use tempfile/mv strategy for GIT-* >> . Makefile: introduce make-var helper function >> . Makefile: fix git-instaweb dependency on gitweb >> . Makefile: drop USE_GETTEXT_SCHEME from GIT-CFLAGS >> >> Simplify the Makefile rules and macros that exist primarily for >> quoting purposes, and make it easier to robustly express the >> dependency rules. >> >> Expecting a reroll. > > I was surprised you carried this in your tree for so long. I do like the > direction it was going, but I was not 100% convinced that it was > something _other_ people liked, and I never really prioritized getting > back to it. Did you actually like it and really wanted to see it > finished, or did just kind of hang around because you had never bothered > to drop it? I liked most of them (especially the LESS/LV one and a few ones on SQ). I am not sure if I had major issues with any parts of them other than those small FIXUPs (yeah, I no longer recall the details ;-). -- 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