Re: [RFC/PATCH v2 0/3] patch-id for merges

2016-09-08 Thread Jeff King
On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 03:51:04PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > This is still marked RFC, because there are really two approaches here, > > and I'm not sure which one is better for "format-patch --base". I'd like > > to get input from Xiaolong Ye (who worked on --base), and Josh Triplett > > (w

Re: [RFC/PATCH v2 0/3] patch-id for merges

2016-09-07 Thread Josh Triplett
On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 06:01:01PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > Here's a re-roll of the series I posted at: > > > http://public-inbox.org/git/20160907075346.z6wtmqnfc6bsu...@sigill.intra.peff.net/ > > Basically, it drops the time for "format-patch --cherry-pick" on a > particular case from 3 minu

[RFC/PATCH v2 0/3] patch-id for merges

2016-09-07 Thread Jeff King
Here's a re-roll of the series I posted at: http://public-inbox.org/git/20160907075346.z6wtmqnfc6bsu...@sigill.intra.peff.net/ Basically, it drops the time for "format-patch --cherry-pick" on a particular case from 3 minutes down to 3 seconds, by avoiding diffs on merge commits. Compared to v1