Thomas Gummerer writes:
> On 09/11, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
>> > Oops, I didn't realize there was another series in flight that also
>> > introduces 'repo_refresh_and_write_index'. Probably should have done
>> > a test merge of t
On 09/11, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> > Oops, I didn't realize there was another series in flight that also
> > introduces 'repo_refresh_and_write_index'. Probably should have done
> > a test merge of this with pu.
>
> Yep, our patches
Hi Thomas,
On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> On 09/05, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Thomas Gummerer writes:
> >
> > > Getting the lock for the index, refreshing it and then writing it is a
> > > pattern that happens more than once throughout the codebase, and isn't
> > > trivial to get r
On 09/05, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Thomas Gummerer writes:
>
> > Getting the lock for the index, refreshing it and then writing it is a
> > pattern that happens more than once throughout the codebase, and isn't
> > trivial to get right. Factor out the refresh_and_write_cache function
> > from bui
Thomas Gummerer writes:
> Getting the lock for the index, refreshing it and then writing it is a
> pattern that happens more than once throughout the codebase, and isn't
> trivial to get right. Factor out the refresh_and_write_cache function
> from builtin/am.c to read-cache.c, so it can be re-u
5 matches
Mail list logo