On 06/18/2016 08:20 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On 06/17/2016 05:20 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> [...] >>> * mh/ref-iterators (2016-06-03) 13 commits >>> (merged to 'next' on 2016-06-06 at c8e79dc) >>> + ... >>> (this branch is used by mh/ref-store; uses mh/split-under-lock; is tangled with mh/update-ref-errors.) >>> >>> The API to iterate over all the refs (i.e. for_each_ref(), etc.) >>> has been revamped. >>> >>> Will merge to 'master'. >> >> It would be preferable (though not critical) to use the promised v3, >> which I just sent [1]. This includes some minor improvements, described >> here [2]. This is also available from my GitHub fork [3] as branch >> "ref-iterators". >> >>> * mh/split-under-lock (2016-05-13) 33 commits >>> (merged to 'next' on 2016-06-03 at 2e71330) >>> + lock_ref_sha1_basic(): only handle REF_NODEREF mode >>> + ... >>> Will merge to 'master'. >> >> Please make sure to pick up the important bugfix discussed here [4], >> which is integrated into branch "split-under-lock" on my GitHub fork [3]. > > Good timing. I was planning to kick split-under-lock and any of its > dependents temporarily out of 'next', so that fixes can choose not > to be incremental, and dependent topics can be rebased on top of the > fixed fondation. Even if we do incremental, [4] is not sufficient > material for me to write a log message for. > > So people who reviewed what has been in 'next' can revisit [4] and > give review comments, while I could just pick up the history > mentioned there, i.e. > > git checkout pu > git pull git://github.com/mhagger/git +split-under-lock:mh/split-under-lock > > and we can start from there? Sure. The branches in my GitHub fork already include all of the improvements and fixes that I know of, and the only outstanding issue is the one that Lars mentioned in this thread (which I believe to be a problem in git-p4). BTW, there are still no conflicts between these branches (split-under-lock, update-ref-errors, ref-iterators, and ref-store) and current master. Therefore, I don't see a need to rebase them onto master. But if you would prefer that I do so, just let me know. Michael -- 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