On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Would we we better off kicking nd/read-directory-recursive-optim
> back to 'pu' (and eventually ejecting it) and replacing it with a
> reroll of Karsten's series when it comes, perhaps?
I have no problem with that. Whatever better should ge
Duy Nguyen writes:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Karsten Blees writes:
>>
>>> This patch series addresses several bugs and performance issues in
>>> .gitignore processing that came up in the inotify discussion.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> How does this interact with the n
Am 19.03.2013 06:20, schrieb Duy Nguyen:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Karsten Blees writes:
>>
>>> This patch series addresses several bugs and performance issues in
>>> .gitignore processing that came up in the inotify discussion.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> How does this
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Karsten Blees writes:
>
>> This patch series addresses several bugs and performance issues in
>> .gitignore processing that came up in the inotify discussion.
>
> Thanks.
>
> How does this interact with the nd/read-directory-recursive-opti
Karsten Blees writes:
> This patch series addresses several bugs and performance issues in
> .gitignore processing that came up in the inotify discussion.
Thanks.
How does this interact with the nd/read-directory-recursive-optim
topic that has been cooking for a while?
--
To unsubscribe from
This patch series addresses several bugs and performance issues in .gitignore
processing that came up in the inotify discussion.
Also available here:
https://github.com/kblees/git/tree/kb/improve-git-status-ignored
git pull git://github.com/kblees/git.git kb/improve-git-status-ignored
Patches 1
6 matches
Mail list logo