On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 12:20:25PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 11:10:34AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> * jt/path-filter-fix (2023-08-01) 7 commits > >> - commit-graph: new filter ver. that fixes murmur3 > >> - repo-settings: introduce commitgraph.changedPathsVersion > >> - t4216: test changed path filters with high bit paths > >> - t/helper/test-read-graph: implement `bloom-filters` mode > >> - bloom.h: make `load_bloom_filter_from_graph()` public > >> - t/helper/test-read-graph.c: extract `dump_graph_info()` > >> - gitformat-commit-graph: describe version 2 of BDAT > >> > >> The Bloom filter used for path limited history traversal was broken > >> on systems whose "char" is unsigned; update the implementation and > >> bump the format version to 2. > >> > >> Still under discussion. > >> cf. <20230801185232.1457172-1-jonathantanmy@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> source: <cover.1690912539.git.jonathantanmy@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I am happy with the most recent round, but I think that it is probably a > > little late in the cycle to be merging down such a large change. > > > > I wouldn't be opposed if you did so, but it may be worth waiting until > > we're on the other side of 2.42 so that other reviewers have a chance to > > Since I hear some folks (not just Google) base their own edition of > Git on 'next', it probably is a good idea to merge it to 'next' and > have their users help find potential issues in it, as I agree that > the area it touches is important in the correctness department. Of > course, it is important enough that the topic may very well want to > be cooked longer than the usual "for at least one calendar week" in > 'next', so I tend to agree that in a first few batches after the > release may be the best time to have it graduate (if it turns out to > be OK). Yep, I agree with all of that. Thanks for juggling the merges, as always :-). Thanks, Taylor
