On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 09:22:30AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > >> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> > >>> * kn/reflog-migration-fix (2025-01-15) 1 commit > >>> (merged to 'next' on 2025-01-16 at ae8f9ce9a0) > >>> + reftable: write correct max_update_index to header > >>> (this branch is used by kn/reflog-migration-fix-followup.) > >>> ... > >> This seems to be breaking on 'next'. > > ... > > reproduces the issue. I haven't found the root cause yet, but will > > mostly call it a day and get back to this tomorrow. > > We have a handful of topics related to refs subsystem in flight, > and I am a bit lost here. > > (1) kn/reflog-migration-fix (the above) was done as a "fix" for the > issue reported by brian in > https://lore.kernel.org/all/Z4UbkcmJAU1MT-Rs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > (2) You mention that (1) is broken in the message I am responding > to. There is no known fix yet, so (1) needs to wait in 'next' > until it gets fixed. > > (3) kn/reflog-migration-fix-followup is a code clean-up for (1); it > has to wait for (2) as well. > > (4) kn/reflog-symref-fix is a fix for a different bug the commit > that introduced the bug (1) addresses. It can proceed > independently from the other topics. > > (5) ps/reflog-migration-with-logall-fix is another fix for a > different bug introduced by the same series whose bugs are > addressed by (1) and (4). It can proceed independently from the > other topics. > > The above is my current understanding; did I miss any other relevant > topics that are related to these efforts, and/or did I misunderstand > the dependencies among them? > > If I am not misunderstanding the current status of these topics, > I'll be marking (4) and (5) for 'next'; I am undecided for (3). Karthik has meanwhile sent a v2 [1] of the broken patch in (1) that fixes the issue discovered in (2). Given that (1) has already been in next, (2) probably needs to be rerolled to be a patch on top of what we already have in next. Other than that yes, I think (4) and (5) can be merged independently of (1) to (3). Patrick [1]: <20250123135613.748916-1-karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx>
