Web lists-archives.com

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2018, #01; Wed, 10)

On 10/10, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> * ps/stash-in-c (2018-08-31) 20 commits
>  - stash: replace all `write-tree` child processes with API calls
>  - stash: optimize `get_untracked_files()` and `check_changes()`
>  - stash: convert `stash--helper.c` into `stash.c`
>  - stash: convert save to builtin
>  - stash: make push -q quiet
>  - stash: convert push to builtin
>  - stash: convert create to builtin
>  - stash: convert store to builtin
>  - stash: mention options in `show` synopsis
>  - stash: convert show to builtin
>  - stash: convert list to builtin
>  - stash: convert pop to builtin
>  - stash: convert branch to builtin
>  - stash: convert drop and clear to builtin
>  - stash: convert apply to builtin
>  - stash: add tests for `git stash show` config
>  - stash: rename test cases to be more descriptive
>  - stash: update test cases conform to coding guidelines
>  - stash: improve option parsing test coverage
>  - sha1-name.c: add `get_oidf()` which acts like `get_oid()`
>  "git stash" rewritten in C.
>  Undecided.  This also has been part of my personal build.  I do not
>  offhand recall if this also had the same exposure to the end users
>  as "rebase" and "rebase -i".  I am tempted to merge this to 'next'
>  soonish.
>  Opinions?

There was a v9 of this series [*1*], which hasn't been picked up yet.
Was that intentional, or an oversight?

I left some comments on that iteration.  Some were just style nits,
but I think at least [*2*] should be addressed before we merge this
down to master, not sure if any of my other comments apply to v8 as
well.  I'm happy to send fixup patches, or a patches on top of
this series for that and my other comments, should they apply to v8,
or wait for Paul-Sebastian to send a re-roll.  What do you prefer?

[*1*]: <cover.1537913094.git.ungureanupaulsebastian@xxxxxxxxx>
[*2*]: <20180930174848.GE2253@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>