Derrick Stolee <stolee@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 8/18/2020 6:50 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> * ds/maintenance-part-1 (2020-08-18) 11 commits >> - maintenance: add trace2 regions for task execution >> - maintenance: add auto condition for commit-graph task >> - maintenance: use pointers to check --auto >> - maintenance: create maintenance.<task>.enabled config >> - maintenance: take a lock on the objects directory >> - maintenance: add --task option >> - maintenance: add commit-graph task >> - maintenance: initialize task array >> - maintenance: replace run_auto_gc() >> - maintenance: add --quiet option >> - maintenance: create basic maintenance runner >> (this branch is used by ds/maintenance-part-2; uses jc/no-update-fetch-head; is tangled with jt/lazy-fetch.) > > Is this "is tangled with jt/lazy-fetch" related to the > fact that jc/no-update-fetch-head was part of my branches, > or are we colliding in other interesting ways? The phrasing is unfortunate but what it wants to convey is that, when the commits that are in this topic but not in 'master', and the commits that are in the other topic but not in 'master', are compared, there is overlap. If one is a subset of the other, 'used by' and 'uses' are the words used to describe these two topics. I just picked to use 'is tangled with' when both sides have unique commits that are not in 'master'. IOW "shares commits with X that are not in 'master'" is what I wanted to say, but has been too lazy to find a better word X-<.
