On Sun, Nov 03, 2024 at 08:05:46PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Thanks everybody, especially Taylor, for keeping things going while > I was away. Unfortunately, we seem to have acquired way too many > topics that were posted and picked up without getting reviewed. As > we discussed a few months ago in <xmqqployf6z5.fsf@gitster.g>, I'll > start discarding topics that have seen no activities for 3 or more > weeks. Interested parties can of course revive these topics. Welcome back, and thanks for trusting me to keep the patches moving between integration branches while you were gone. > With all the integration branches and topics broken out: > > https://github.com/gitster/git/ Now that we are no longer referring to my tree here to list the broken-out topics, I have cleaned out topics besides my own that would ordinarily reside in this tree. > [Graduated to 'master'] > > * ds/path-walk-1 (2024-10-31) 6 commits > - path-walk: mark trees and blobs as UNINTERESTING > - path-walk: visit tags and cached objects > - path-walk: allow consumer to specify object types > - t6601: add helper for testing path-walk API > - test-lib-functions: add test_cmp_sorted > - path-walk: introduce an object walk by path > > Introduce a new API to visit objects in batches based on a common > path, or by type. > > Under discussion. > cf. <ZyUqr/wb5K4Og9j9@nand.local> > source: <pull.1818.git.1730356023.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> This is marked as "Graduated to 'master'", although I suspect it isn't. I thought that it would have been because the topic went away, although I still see this in 'jch' via your 3503a15e17 (Merge branch 'kh/bundle-docs' into jch, 2024-11-03). Perhaps this WC report was generated before moving the topic back into 'jch'? In either event, as noted by <ZyUqr/wb5K4Og9j9@nand.local>, this topic is still under discussion and is not ready to be merged (yet). > * tb/cross-pack-delta-reuse (2024-10-11) 11 commits > . pack-bitmap: enable reusing deltas with base objects in 'haves' bitmap > . pack-bitmap.c: record whether the result was filtered > . pack-bitmap: enable cross-pack delta reuse > . t5332: enable OFS_DELTAs via test_pack_objects_reused > . write_reused_pack_one(): translate bit positions directly > . pack-bitmap: drop `from_midx` field from `bitmapped_pack` > . pack-bitmap.c: extract `find_base_bitmap_pos()` > . pack-bitmap.c: compare `base_offset` to `delta_obj_offset` > . pack-bitmap.c: delay calling 'offset_to_pack_pos()' > . pack-bitmap.c: avoid unnecessary `offset_to_pack_pos()` > . pack-bitmap.c: do not pass `pack_pos` to `try_partial_reuse()` > > Allow pack-objects to reuse an existing delta in a packfile, when > it ends up sending the base object from a different packfile. > > Needs review. > source: <cover.1728505840.git.me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> This topic was ejected, which is fine since it hasn't seen any review in a few weeks. It's on my list of things to resend. > * tb/incremental-midx-part-2 (2024-10-04) 17 commits > . fixup! pack-bitmap.c: open and store incremental bitmap layers > . fixup! midx: implement writing incremental MIDX bitmaps > . midx: implement writing incremental MIDX bitmaps > . pack-bitmap.c: use `ewah_or_iterator` for type bitmap iterators > . pack-bitmap.c: keep track of each layer's type bitmaps > . ewah: implement `struct ewah_or_iterator` > . pack-bitmap.c: apply pseudo-merge commits with incremental MIDXs > . pack-bitmap.c: compute disk-usage with incremental MIDXs > . pack-bitmap.c: teach `rev-list --test-bitmap` about incremental MIDXs > . pack-bitmap.c: support bitmap pack-reuse with incremental MIDXs > . pack-bitmap.c: teach `show_objects_for_type()` about incremental MIDXs > . pack-bitmap.c: teach `bitmap_for_commit()` about incremental MIDXs > . pack-bitmap.c: open and store incremental bitmap layers > . pack-revindex: prepare for incremental MIDX bitmaps > . Documentation: describe incremental MIDX bitmaps > . Merge branch 'tb/pseudo-merge-bitmap-fixes' into tb/incremental-midx-part-2 > . Merge branch 'tb/incremental-midx-part-1' into tb/incremental-midx-part-2 > > Incremental updates of multi-pack index files. > > Needs review. > source: <cover.1723760847.git.me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > source: <ZwBsbW5jsFw0mxKk@nand.local> Ditto. Thanks, Taylor
