Web lists-archives.com

Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2017, #04; Fri, 12)




On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> * ab/grep-preparatory-cleanup (2017-05-12) 15 commits
>  - grep: add tests to fix blind spots with \0 patterns
>  - grep: prepare for testing binary regexes containing rx metacharacters
>  - SQUASH???
>  - grep: add a test helper function for less verbose -f \0 tests
>  - grep: add tests for grep pattern types being passed to submodules
>  - grep: amend submodule recursion test for regex engine testing
>  - grep: add tests for --threads=N and grep.threads
>  - SQUASH???
>  - grep: change non-ASCII -i test to stop using --debug
>  - grep: add a test for backreferences in PCRE patterns
>  - grep: add a test asserting that --perl-regexp dies when !PCRE
>  - log: add exhaustive tests for pattern style options & config
>  - test-lib: rename the LIBPCRE prerequisite to PCRE
>  - grep & rev-list doc: stop promising libpcre for --perl-regexp
>  - Makefile & configure: reword inaccurate comment about PCRE
>
>  (what is queued here is only the early part of a larger series)

What's the reason for only queuing it up to this point? AFAICT there's
no particular breakages past this point that would prevent the whole
thing from being queued.

I'm going to fix the issues noted on-list, but wondering what I should
do with the next submission. Do you think with fixes you'd like to
take the whole thing?


> --------------------------------------------------
> [Cooking]
>
> * ab/compat-regex-update (2017-05-12) 3 commits
>  - DONTMERGE compat/regex: make it compile with -Werror=int-to-pointer-cast
>  - compat/regex: update the gawk regex engine from upstream
>  - compat/regex: add a README with a maintenance guide
>
>  Update compat/regex we borrowed from gawk.  It seems that some
>  customizations we made to the older one were dropped by mistake.

Do you prefer that I pick up JS's "compat/regex: fix compilation on
Windows" patch & re-send, or for you to add that on top after that
discussion is resolved?