On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 11:45 PM Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I took a look through the range-diff as well as the patches themselves > again (skimming through the last three, which are much more > straightforward than the preceding ones). > > Everything looks good to me here, and I think that this version is ready > to get picked up once we're on the other side of 2.42. Thanks again for your review! > I left a couple of comments throughout, but none of them merit a reroll > on their own. I think there are a couple of things we could easily > ignore (marking parameters as "const", etc.), and a couple of things > that we should probably take a look at after the dust has settled here. The version 5 I just sent should fix all the small things that you found in your review. > We *may* want to fix up the test_must_fail invocation that has the > environment variable on the left-hand side instead of using > "test_must_fail env", but I don't know for sure. This is fixed by squashing Junio's 'SQUASH???' commit in version 5. > I do think that we should take another look at disabling the bitmap > machinery when given `--filter`, but I think that, too, can be done in > another series. I agree. I plan to do it later when this is merged. I think it would make it easier to use the new --filter feature, but it would require changes in code, tests and documentation, which can be done later. Thanks, Christian.
