On 6/7/2021 9:05 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Derrick Stolee <stolee@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On 6/7/2021 8:34 AM, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote: >>> From: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> ... >>> + old_entry = make_transient_cache_entry( >>> + entry[0].mode, &entry[0].oid, >>> + old_path, /* stage */ 0); >> >> I didn't realize this before I started integrating with >> v2.32.0 (which I should have done before submitting v5) that >> make_transient_cache_entry() has changed its prototype to >> include a memory pool parameter. > > Sorry for the trouble---these are usually all known to me for topics > I happened to have picked up in 'seen', since I try to make it a rule > that 'seen' must be a descendant of 'master'. > > How can I usefully communicate the conflicts I find out during the > integration cycles to topic owners, I wonder. This is my fault for stacking topics. I used a GitGitGadget PR to target a custom merge of other topics in flight, so my merges were testing against a static target. When those topics were merged, I should have updated my PR to point to 'master' or even 'next'. Thanks, -Stolee
