Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2018, #02; Tue, 11)
- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:13:23 -0700
- From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2018, #02; Tue, 11)
Stephen & Linda Smith <ischis2@xxxxxxx> writes:
> On Tuesday, September 11, 2018 3:20:19 PM MST Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> * jc/wt-status-state-cleanup (2018-09-07) 1 commit
>> - WIP: roll wt_status_state into wt_status and populate in the collect
>> phase (this branch uses ss/wt-status-committable.)
>> * ss/wt-status-committable (2018-09-07) 4 commits
>> - wt-status.c: set the committable flag in the collect phase
>> - t7501: add test of "commit --dry-run --short"
>> - wt-status: rename commitable to committable
>> - wt-status.c: move has_unmerged earlier in the file
>> (this branch is used by jc/wt-status-state-cleanup.)
> I note that the jc/wt-status-state-cleanup branch is a patch "for illustration
> purposes only" .
> I was about to update that patch to start dealing with the free() function
> calls, but noted you added the patch. Do you want me to take that patch and
> continue on? Or does someone else have something in progress?
I do not plan to. In general, anything that is only in 'pu' is a
fair game---when a better alternative appears, or a discussion leads
to a conclusion that a change is unneeded, they are replaced and/or
discarded. Just think of them as being kept slightly better record
of existence than merely being in the list archive, nothing more.