Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, 27 Oct 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> * ag/merge-strategies-in-c (2020-10-06) 11 commits >> - sequencer: use the "octopus" merge strategy without forking >> - sequencer: use the "resolve" strategy without forking >> - merge: use the "octopus" strategy without forking >> - merge: use the "resolve" strategy without forking >> - merge-octopus: rewrite in C >> - merge-recursive: move better_branch_name() to merge.c >> - merge-resolve: rewrite in C >> - merge-index: don't fork if the requested program is `git-merge-one-file' >> - merge-index: libify merge_one_path() and merge_all() >> - merge-one-file: rewrite in C >> - t6027: modernise tests >> >> The resolve and octopus merge strategy backends have been rewritten >> in C. > > From where I sit, this is ready for `next`. I just went back to the thread. https://lore.kernel.org/git/20201005122646.27994-1-alban.gruin@xxxxxxxxx/ It seems that the topic saw quite a few comments and help by Phillip Wood in its earliest iteration, but I didn't see any review from those other than myself on the last iteration v3, and the review comments on the iteration haven't been acted upon yet. That was why I threw the topic in "needs review" bucket. The later half of the series got no comments (I lost steam after reviewing the earlier half) and I suspect they would have be adjusted for fixes and improvements done to polish the earlier parts, so I am not sure where your "ready for 'next'" comes from. Thanks.
