On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 9:37 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > A release candidate 2.30-rc1 has been tagged; there are too many > topics in flight, sadly many of which haven't been adequately > reviewed. I think there are a couple of topics left in 'next' that > are obvious candidates for the final, but it would be lovely if we > can figure out how to get topics in 'seen' that haven't got enough > love unstuck. I'll try to post an RFC on the sparse-checkout handling soon; sorry it's taken me a while. One question on your labelling for the merge-ort, stuff, though... > * en/merge-ort-recursive (2020-12-16) 4 commits > - merge-ort: implement merge_incore_recursive() > - merge-ort: make clear_internal_opts() aware of partial clearing > - merge-ort: copy a few small helper functions from merge-recursive.c > - commit: move reverse_commit_list() from merge-recursive > (this branch uses en/merge-ort-2 and en/merge-ort-impl; is tangled with en/merge-ort-3.) ...this comment here is repeated below... > * en/merge-ort-3 (2020-12-15) 11 commits > - merge-ort: add implementation of type-changed rename handling > - merge-ort: add implementation of normal rename handling > - merge-ort: add implementation of rename collisions > - merge-ort: add implementation of rename/delete conflicts > - merge-ort: add implementation of both sides renaming differently > - merge-ort: add implementation of both sides renaming identically > - merge-ort: add basic outline for process_renames() > - merge-ort: implement compare_pairs() and collect_renames() > - merge-ort: implement detect_regular_renames() > - merge-ort: add initial outline for basic rename detection > - merge-ort: add basic data structures for handling renames > (this branch uses en/merge-ort-2 and en/merge-ort-impl; is tangled with en/merge-ort-recursive.) What do you mean when you say these two topics are tangled? They were written to avoid all contextual conflicts, and to be allowed to merge in either order, and I just re-verified that they merge cleanly. So I'm not understanding this comment. If there are any remaining issues in this series, I'd be happy to fix them up. I'm not aware of any, and Stollee has reviewed the series[1]. I was planning on submitting another topic next week, directory rename detection, that builds on this series. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/6448806f-791b-610a-06de-7be5650334e6@xxxxxxxxx/, note that his comment was on series v2 and I addressed his one remaining point in v3.
