Web lists-archives.com

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

> * pw/diff-color-moved-ws-fix (2018-10-04) 5 commits
>  - diff --color-moved: fix a memory leak
>  - diff --color-moved-ws: fix another memory leak
>  - diff --color-moved-ws: fix a memory leak
>  - diff --color-moved-ws: fix out of bounds string access
>  - diff --color-moved-ws: fix double free crash
>  Various fixes to "diff --color-moved-ws".
>  What's the status of this topic?

Per [1] ("The whole series is
Reviewed-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx>"),
I would suggest merging to 'next'.

[1] https://public-inbox.org/git/CAGZ79kbamUK=d+-ejy9vopDiVZF7OVOngz1Zx9y04VR3HnmoXg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

> * sb/strbuf-h-update (2018-09-29) 1 commit
>  - strbuf.h: format according to coding guidelines
>  Code clean-up to serve as a BCP example.
>  What's the status of this one after the discussion thread stopped here?
>  cf. <CAGZ79kbV6QjsFKcD2uG_P9j1AvzSNQSi-_jXGQ9w0YU9fjhEGg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

I was waiting for more discussion and stricter guidelines,
which never happened.

The only controversial issue about this patch is whether we want
to name all parameters or only when we feel like it.

Peff did not seem to care about this particular detail

You suggested to embrace it further and use caps for the parameter
names in the docs comment.

The patch as-is just adds names everywhere.
I'd be happy to resend with either
(a) not enforcing names everywhere, but only as needed or
(b) having names everywhere, capitalizing them NAMES in
    the doc comment.

I am tempted to ask for
(c) take as-is, defer the rewording of doc strings for a follow up patch.

> * sb/grep-submodule-cleanup (2018-10-10) 1 commit
>  - builtin/grep.c: remove superfluous submodule code
>  Code clean-up.
>  cf. <20181010001037.74709-1-jonathantanmy@xxxxxxxxxx>

Will resend.

> * bw/submodule-name-to-dir (2018-08-10) 2 commits
>  - submodule: munge paths to submodule git directories
>  - submodule: create helper to build paths to submodule gitdirs
>  In modern repository layout, the real body of a cloned submodule
>  repository is held in .git/modules/ of the superproject, indexed by
>  the submodule name.  URLencode the submodule name before computing
>  the name of the directory to make sure they form a flat namespace.
>  Kicked back to 'pu', expecting further work on the topic.
>  cf. <CAGZ79kYnbjaPoWdda0SM_-_X77mVyYC7JO61OV8nm2yj3Q1OvQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


> * sb/submodule-move-head-with-corruption (2018-08-28) 2 commits
>  - submodule.c: warn about missing submodule git directories
>  - t2013: add test for missing but active submodule
>  Will discard and wait for a cleaned-up rewrite.
>  cf. <20180907195349.GA103699@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Yeah I think discarding this is the right move.

> * sb/submodule-recursive-fetch-gets-the-tip (2018-09-12) 9 commits
>  - builtin/fetch: check for submodule updates for non branch fetches
>  - fetch: retry fetching submodules if sha1 were not fetched
>  - submodule: fetch in submodules git directory instead of in worktree
>  - submodule.c: do not copy around submodule list
>  - submodule: move global changed_submodule_names into fetch submodule struct
>  - submodule.c: sort changed_submodule_names before searching it
>  - submodule.c: fix indentation
>  - sha1-array: provide oid_array_filter
>  - string-list: add string_list_{pop, last} functions
>  "git fetch --recurse-submodules" may not fetch the necessary commit
>  that is bound to the superproject, which is getting corrected.
>  Expecting a reroll.
>  cf. <b16af8c0-0435-0de4-ed6c-53888d6190af@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

is fixed in

>  cf. <CAGZ79kbavjVbTqXsmtjW6=jhkq47_p3mc6=92xOp4_mfhqDtvw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

That is fixed locally

>  cf. <CAGZ79kZKKf9N8yx9EuCRZhrZS_mA2218PouEG7aHDhK2bJGEdA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

That has been addressed via

Will resend after a local review.

> * pk/rebase-in-c-6-final (2018-10-09) 1 commit
>  - rebase: default to using the builtin rebase
>  (this branch uses ag/rebase-i-in-c, js/rebase-in-c-5.5-work-with-rebase-i-in-c, pk/rebase-in-c, pk/rebase-in-c-2-basic, pk/rebase-in-c-3-acts, pk/rebase-in-c-4-opts and pk/rebase-in-c-5-test; is tangled with ag/sequencer-reduce-rewriting-todo, jc/rebase-in-c-5-test-typofix and js/rebase-i-break.)
>  The final step of rewriting "rebase -i" in C.
>  Undecided.
>  I've been using this (i.e. the whole "rebase -i" and "rebase"
>  rewritten in C) in my personal build, and I also know users on
>  Windows port have been using it with the last feature release.  I
>  am tempted to merge the whole thing to 'next' soonish.
>  Opinions?  It's the last chance to remove any existing and avoid
>  any future "oops, that was wrong, and here is a fix-up"
>  embarrassment in these topics.

Yes, please merge to next.