Re: Git Test Coverage Report (Thursday, May 30th)

Thanks very much for this Derrick. I looked into it and it turns out that the missing coverage in blame.c for "certainties[i] = CERTAINTY_NOT_CALCULATED" was due to earlier code overwriting the same value in most cases, thereby defeating an optimization. I've deleted that earlier code and now cover

[PATCH] blame - fix some issues identified by coverage report.

From: Michael Platings Thanks to Derrick Stolee for highlighting missing coverage. In the case of "certainties[i] = CERTAINTY_NOT_CALCULATED" this was defeating an optimization that preserved results of calculations between line-matching passes. This had caused other code to never be executed -

[RFC PATCH] doc: change 'The standard email format' to 'The standard date format'

The current content of date-formats.txt under the RFC 2822 section specifies 'The standard email format' whereas the format specified is a date format Signed-off-by: Victory Osikwemhe --- Documentation/date-formats.txt | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documenta

Re: [PATCH] worktree add: be tolerant of corrupt worktrees

On Sat, 18 May 2019 at 12:50, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 2:46 PM Eric Sunshine wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:50 AM Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy > > wrote: > > > find_worktree() can die() unexpectedly because it uses real_path() > > > instead of the gentler version. When it

[PATCH] RelNotes: minor typo fixes in 2.22.0 draft

Signed-off-by: Todd Zullinger --- These are all just minor typos I noticed while reading the release notes. I did find the first entry on the checkout --no-overlay read a bit strangely with the multiple "out's" in '... checking out paths out ...'. Is it any easier to read with: * "git check

Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2019, #05; Thu, 30)

Hi Junio, On 31 May 2019 23:04:38 GMT+05:30, Junio C Hamano wrote: >Johannes Schindelin writes: > >> On Thu, 30 May 2019, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> * ds/close-object-store (2019-05-28) 3 commits >>> - packfile: rename close_all_packs to close_object_store >>> - packfile: close commit-graph i

Re: [PATCH] make slash-rules more readable

Minor spelling mistake at end: On 31/05/2019 08:44, Dr. Adam Nielsen wrote: + (a regular file), "foo/bar" (a diretory), but it does not match + "foo/bar/hello.c" (a regular file), as the asterisk in the + patter does not match "bar/hello.c" which has a slash in it. s/patter/pattern/ + -

Re: [PATCH] make slash-rules more readable

Hi Junio, On 31/05/2019 17:30, Junio C Hamano wrote: I think the updated text is readable, except for one nit. Specifically, if you took my suggestion in an earlier review to explicitly say that leading slash is merely a workaround for a string without slash to anchor the pattern to the director