Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Also re your <xmqqbl5ml70u.fsf@gitster.g> I'll switch to quoting > Message-ID's in that style, and not as > https://lore.kernel.org/git/<msgid> links. FWIW I was doing the latter > for the benefit of readers on the sidelines, but will switch. I can deal with either. What I meant was that often resend of the patch outside the context of "What's cooking" would be easier to find the patches. >> * ab/commit-graph-usage (2021-08-25) 7 commits >> - commit-graph: show "unexpected subcommand" error >> - commit-graph: show usage on "commit-graph [write|verify] garbage" >> - commit-graph: early exit to "usage" on !argc >> - multi-pack-index: refactor "goto usage" pattern >> - commit-graph: use parse_options_concat() >> - commit-graph: remove redundant handling of -h >> - commit-graph: define common usage with a macro > > Taylor, SZEDER: That's at > <cover-v4-0.7-00000000000-20210823T122854Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx>, you > reviwed the earlier > <cover-0.6-00000000000-20210720T113707Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx>, what do you > think about this version? >> * ab/unbundle-progress (2021-08-27) 5 commits > > This has outstanding feedback at > <cover-v3-0.5-00000000000-20210826T140414Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx> that I need > to respond to. OK. >> * zh/cherry-pick-advice (2021-08-23) 1 commit >> - cherry-pick: use better advice message >> >> The advice message that "git cherry-pick" gives when it asks >> conflicted replay of a commit to be resolved by the end user has >> been updated. >> >> Will merge to 'next'? > > I think so, I looked it over as part of browsing advice()-related > changes, looks good to me. Thanks. >> * es/config-based-hooks (2021-08-19) 7 commits >> - hook: allow out-of-repo 'git hook' invocations >> - hook: include hooks from the config >> - hook: allow running non-native hooks >> - hook: introduce "git hook list" >> - hook: allow parallel hook execution >> - hook: run a list of hooks instead >> - Merge branch 'ab/config-based-hooks-base' into es/config-based-hooks >> (this branch uses ab/config-based-hooks-base.) >> >> Revamp the hooks subsystem to allow multiple of them to trigger >> upon the same event and control via the configuration variables. >> >> Will merge to 'next'? >> cf. <87v93wflm0.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > This needs a re-roll based on my comments in reply to > <20210819033450.3382652-1-emilyshaffer@xxxxxxxxxx>. It's mostly ready as > far as the end-state is concerneb, but e.g. will break "rebase" (a > commit in the middle doesn't compile), leaks memory etc. > > It needs a re-roll of ab/config-based-hooks-base, which I was waiting on > some of Emily's feedback to do. Looks like there's no outstanding things > there, so iwll work on that SOON. OK, thanks. Will mark both as expecting reroll on my end. >> * js/advise-when-skipping-cherry-picked (2021-08-10) 2 commits >> - SQUASH??? >> - sequencer: advise if skipping cherry-picked commit >> >> "git rebase" by default skips changes that are equivalent to >> commits that are already in the history the branch is rebased onto; >> give messages when this happens to let the users be aware of >> skipped commits, and also teach them how to tell "rebase" to keep >> duplicated changes. > > This LGTM with your proposed obviously-correct squash. > > Re comment about ab/retire-advice-config above: I could also just fold > this into that series if you'd prefer, i.e. it would be one way to deal > with the only outstanding merge conflict in advice.c between > master..seen. Let's see how far we can go with these two as separate topics; I do not foresee much issues in either topic and can advance them to 'next' soonish. >> * cb/makefile-apple-clang (2021-08-06) 3 commits >> - build: catch clang that identifies itself as "$VENDOR clang" >> - build: clang version may not be followed by extra words >> - build: update detect-compiler for newer Xcode version >> >> Build update. >> >> Will merge to 'next'. > > Makes sense. Any reason other than lack of time that you opted not to go > for the IMO simpler approach I suggested in > <87bl6aypke.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>? I just didn't see the need for this update to be so big to deserve such a total rewrite. >> * ab/lib-subtest (2021-08-05) 11 commits >> - test-lib tests: assert 1 exit code, not non-zero >> - test-lib tests: refactor common part of check_sub_test_lib_test*() >> - test-lib tests: avoid subshell for "test_cmp" for readability >> - test-lib tests: assert no copy/pasted mock test code >> - test-lib tests: get rid of copy/pasted mock test code >> - test-lib tests: don't provide a description for the sub-tests >> - test-lib tests: stop using a subshell in write_sub_test_lib_test() >> - test-lib tests: split up "write and run" into two functions >> - test-lib tests: move "run_sub_test" to a new lib-subtest.sh >> - Merge branch 'ps/t0000-output-directory-fix' into ab/lib-subtest >> - Merge branch 'jk/t0000-subtests-fix' into ab/lib-subtest >> >> Updates to the tests in t0000 to test the test framework. > > I think with my re-roll at > <cover-v3-0.9-0000000000-20210805T103237Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx> it should be > OK to declare this good to go sooner than later. I.e. the only trouble I > can imagine this causing in > <patch-v3-6.9-bc79b29f3c-20210805T103237Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx> is now easy > to revert in isolation. What's queued is v3, I think. In the list of messages in the thread on page https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover-v3-0.9-0000000000-20210805T103237Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx/ it is still a bit disturbing to see these three versions were sent without much reaction to the list. >> * ab/make-tags-cleanup (2021-08-05) 5 commits >> - Makefile: normalize clobbering & xargs for tags targets >> - Makefile: remove "cscope.out", not "cscope*" in cscope.out target >> - Makefile: don't use "FORCE" for tags targets >> - Makefile: add QUIET_GEN to "cscope" target >> - Makefile: move ".PHONY: cscope" near its target >> >> Build clean-up for "make tags" and friends. >> >> Expecting a reroll. >> 4/5 may want a minor tweak to the log and the patch text but otherwise looks good. > > (Summary copied from <87v93wflm0.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>) > > This entire comment has been in What's Cooking since v3 of the series, > but v4 has been out since August 4th: > <cover-v4-0.5-00000000000-20210804T225222Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx> You're right. The topic branch has the v4 but the comment in the What's cooking report is simply stale. >> * ab/test-tool-cache-cleanup (2021-08-24) 4 commits >> - read-cache perf: add a perf test for refresh_index() >> - test-tool: migrate read-cache-again to parse_options() >> - test-tool: migrate read-cache-perf to parse_options() >> - test-tool: split up test-tool read-cache >> >> Test code shuffling. > > I had a "take it or leave it" comment at > <878s0nz5q2.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>. Thanks, I'd eject it then. It should be easy to send in updates when the tree is otherwise more quiescent.
