On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 5:26 PM Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Thanks everyone for your reviews. I believe I've addressed all review > comments, including the one from Elijah about the test failing with > sha256 (which turns out to be because I didn't add a call to > setup_git_directory(), which the other test helpers do). Thanks for fixing those up. I spotted some minor nits/questions, but nothing big. Looks like Junio did spot some bigger items...which raises a question for me. I have a series (https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.969.git.1622856485.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/) that also touches partial clones. Our series are semantically independent, but we both add a repository parameter to fetch_objects(). So we both make the same change, but you also make additional nearby changes, resulting in two trivial conflicts. So, should I rebase my series on yours, should you rebase on mine, or should we just let both proceed independently and double-check Junio resolves the trivial conflicts in favor of your side? Thoughts?
