Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH 1/2] refs: Add for_each_worktree_ref for iterating over all worktree HEADs




> Just as an fyi, its usually fine to send out a path RFC

Ah, this is helpful! Yes, I was still trying to get the tests to run,
so consider this WIP.

I have since gotten them to run and found one failure which I fixed
(didn't null-check `commit`).

Waiting for them to finish again, will send new patches when done.
Sorry about that.


> but I'm just hoping to provide you with some of the expectations we have.

Thank you!

I thought I'd submit the patch early so that I could get the basic
design through review; I wasn't sure if I was using the right APIs for
this task.

I should probably write a test for this too. Looks straightforward enough.

> Welcome! Take a load off and stay a while :)

:)
-Manish Goregaokar


On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Brandon Williams <bmwill@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/17, Manish Goregaokar wrote:
>> Oh, btw, refs.c needs an #include "worktree.h" to work; I didn't get a
>> chance to test this after rebasing onto the maint branch.
>>
>> (There's also another fix it needs to have no warnings, but that's not
>> going to affect building). I have this fixed locally, but I'll wait
>> for the rest of the review before pushing them up.
>> -Manish Goregaokar
>
> Just as an fyi, its usually fine to send out a path RFC (request for
> comments) or WIP (Work in Progress) which compiles with warnings (or
> maybe not at all) and which doesn't pass all tests.  If you do that just
> make sure to indicate as such.
>
> Though if you are sending out a patch which you want to be seriously
> reviewed and ultimately merged then the best practice is to ensure that
> it compiles without warnings and that all tests pass.  I'm definitely
> guilty of this occasionally (no one's perfect!) but I'm just hoping to
> provide you with some of the expectations we have.
>
> I'm assuming you're newer to the community, so Welcome! Take a load off
> and stay a while :)
>
> --
> Brandon Williams