Web lists-archives.com

Re: Subscribing Apple people to git-security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 01:15:19PM -0700, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote:
>> > I hope that maybe they're also interested in reducing the overall
>> > diff between upstream Git and what ships with XCode. Last time I
>> > looked (which was admittedly a while ago), a lot of the changes
>> > seemed like things that could probably be considered upstream.
>> I'm very very interested in having reduced differences between what we
>> ship in Xcode and what is upstream.  I've been maintaining a repo with
>> our patches that I rebase as we move forward, in the hope that these
>> changes might be useful to others and a derivative of them might
>> eventually be accepted upstream.  See
>> https://github.com/jeremyhu/git/commits/master for the current set of
>> changes that are in our shipping git (currently on top of 2.17.1).
> Thanks for sharing. Skimming over it, I see:
>  - several of the changes look related to run-time relocation. There was
>    a series that shipped in v2.18.0 related to this, so that may reduce
>    your diff once you rebase.
>  - The xcode_gitattributes() bits aren't likely to go upstream as-is.
>    But possibly these could ship as a default $sysconfdir/gitattributes?
>  - the rest look like assorted little fixes that probably could go
>    upstream

Jeremy, could you elaborate on what
https://github.com/jeremyhu/git/commit/61b42bc5d2 was about? I.e.
where was this discussed & tests for this refused?

Seems sensible to me to have this in some form, but the test as-is
seems to be a general regression test, not Apple-specific, so it would
need to be changed somewhat, or does it only happen with some other
custom patch of yours?