Jonathan Nieder writes:
> The patch "fix handling of badly named refs"[1] is still undergoing
> heavy churn.
>
> I think it's worth getting that one right.
Oh, no question about it. I was only making sure that I didn't miss
availability of updates for larger series we saw during this cycle.
--
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I know that a review-update cycle is still going in the dark at
>
> https://code-review.googlesource.com/#/q/topic:ref-transaction
>
> for this series.
Eh, it's at least public and doesn't flood the list with rebased
versions of the series.
Would you prefer if there wer
I know that a review-update cycle is still going in the dark at
https://code-review.googlesource.com/#/q/topic:ref-transaction
for this series. Are we almost there for v22 which hopefully be the
final before we merge it to 'next' and go incremental?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Does the order of changes that appear in
>
> https://code-review.googlesource.com/#/q/project:git+branch:master+topic:ref-transaction
>
> have any significance? e.g. is a "topic" supposed to be a single
> strand of pearls on top of the "branch", and the top one is the tip,
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Jonathan: Is a current version of this patch series set up to be
>> fetched so that it can be reviewed outside Gerrit?
>
> The current tip is 06d707cb63e34fc55a18ecc47e668f3c44acae57 from
> https://code.googlesource.com/git (fetch-by-sha1 shoul
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan: Is a current version of this patch series set up to be
> fetched so that it can be reviewed outside Gerrit?
The current tip is 06d707cb63e34fc55a18ecc47e668f3c44acae57 from
https://code.googlesource.com/git (fetch-by-sha1 should work). Each
reroll gets its own r
Michael Haggerty writes:
> On 09/13/2014 01:57 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Michael Haggerty wrote:
Jonathan Nieder writes:
>>
> so I'll send a reroll of the series as-is in an hour or so.
>>>
>>> Jonathan: Is a current version of this patch series set up for review in
>>> Gerrit?
>>
On 09/13/2014 01:57 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Michael Haggerty wrote:
>>> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
so I'll send a reroll of the series as-is in an hour or so.
>>
>> Jonathan: Is a current version of this patch series set up for review in
>> Gerrit?
>
> Yes.
> (https://code-review.google
Junio C Hamano writes:
> I noticed that with this series merged to the version I use daily,
> detaching HEAD (i.e. "git checkout HEAD^0") breaks my HEAD reflog,
> which made me redo the integration ejecting the series out of 'pu'.
>
> Not happy, as my workflow relies fairly heavily on detached HE
Michael Haggerty wrote:
>> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>>> so I'll send a reroll of the series as-is in an hour or so.
>
> Jonathan: Is a current version of this patch series set up for review in
> Gerrit?
Yes.
(https://code-review.googlesource.com/#/q/project:git+topic:ref-transaction)
Thanks,
Jon
On 09/12/2014 09:56 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
> [...]
>> There were a few other minor changes, and I think with them the series
>> should be ready for "next". My "send and hope that more reviewers
>> appear" strategy didn't really work,...
>
> You sent them just a few d
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
>> It's "Oops, the next one (refs.c: do not permit err == NULL) is broken,
>> and this is to patch it up in advance". :)
>>
>> But it should apply on top, too.
>
> I think "in advance" makes sense for this one, too.
>
>> There were a few other m
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> It's "Oops, the next one (refs.c: do not permit err == NULL) is broken,
> and this is to patch it up in advance". :)
>
> But it should apply on top, too.
I think "in advance" makes sense for this one, too.
> There were a few other minor changes, and I think with them t
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
> > Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> The tag fetched and built as-is seems to break 5514 among other
>>> things ("git remote rm" segfaults).
>>
>> Yeah, I noticed that right after sending the series out. :/
>>
>> The patch below fixes it[1].
>
> Is this me
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
>>> These patches are also available from the git repository at
>>>
>>> git://repo.or.cz/git/jrn.git tags/rs/ref-transaction
>>
>> The tag fetched and built as-is seems to break 5514 among other
>> things ("git remote
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>> These patches are also available from the git repository at
>>
>> git://repo.or.cz/git/jrn.git tags/rs/ref-transaction
>
> The tag fetched and built as-is seems to break 5514 among other
> things ("git remote rm" segfaults).
Yeah, I noticed th
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> These patches are also available from the git repository at
>
> git://repo.or.cz/git/jrn.git tags/rs/ref-transaction
The tag fetched and built as-is seems to break 5514 among other
things ("git remote rm" segfaults).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "un
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
>> The next series from Ronnie's collection is available at
>> https://code-review.googlesource.com/#/q/topic:ref-transaction in case
>> someone wants a fresh series to look at.
>
> Here is the outcome of that review. It could use another set of
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> The next series from Ronnie's collection is available at
> https://code-review.googlesource.com/#/q/topic:ref-transaction in case
> someone wants a fresh series to look at.
Here is the outcome of that review. It could use another set of eyes
(hint, hint) but should be mo
Hi Junio,
Michael reviewed the rest of rs/ref-transaction-1 (thanks!) and some
more small tweaks resulted --- in particular, there was a missing call
to ref_transaction_free. Interdiff below. This is meant to replace
rs/ref-transaction-1 in 'pu' and should be ready for 'next'.
These patches are
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 08/26/2014 02:03 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> [...]
>>> I've having trouble keeping track of how patches change, which patches
>>> have been reviewed and which haven't, unaddressed comments, and so on,
>>> so
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
>> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>
>>> This series teaches the tag, replace, commit, cherry-pick,
>>> fast-import, checkout -b, branch, receive-pack, and http-fetch
>>> commands and all update_ref and delete_ref callers to use the ref
>>> transaction
On 08/26/2014 02:03 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> [...]
>> I've having trouble keeping track of how patches change, which patches
>> have been reviewed and which haven't, unaddressed comments, and so on,
>> so as an experiment I've pushed this part of the series to the Gerri
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
>> This series teaches the tag, replace, commit, cherry-pick,
>> fast-import, checkout -b, branch, receive-pack, and http-fetch
>> commands and all update_ref and delete_ref callers to use the ref
>> transaction API instead of lock_ref_sha1.
>>
>
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> This series teaches the tag, replace, commit, cherry-pick,
> fast-import, checkout -b, branch, receive-pack, and http-fetch
> commands and all update_ref and delete_ref callers to use the ref
> transaction API instead of lock_ref_sha1.
>
> The main user-visible change shou
Hi again,
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> It seems that I can hold the topic in 'pu' a bit longer and expect a
> reroll from this effort before merging it to 'next'?
Sorry for the delay. The following changes on top of "master"
(refs.c: change ref_transaction_update() to do error checking and
return st
Jonathan Nieder writes:
>> https://code-review.googlesource.com/#/q/topic:ref-transaction-1
>
> Outcome of the experiment: patches gained some minor changes and then
>
> 1-12
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder
>
> 13
> Reviewed-by: Michael Haggerty
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Niede
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
>> ref-transaction-1 (2014-07-16) 20 commits
>> -
>> Second batch of ref transactions
>>
>> - refs.c: make delete_ref use a transaction
>> - refs.c: make prune_ref use a transaction to del
Hi,
Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
> List, please see here an overview and ordering of the ref transaction
> patch series.
Thanks much for this.
[...]
> rs/ref-transaction-0
[...]
> Has been merged into next.
This is even part of "master" now, so if people have review comments
then they can make them
Ronnie Sahlberg writes:
> List, please see here an overview and ordering of the ref transaction
> patch series.
> These series build on each other and needs to be applied in the order
> listed below.
>
> This is an update.
>
> rs/ref-transaction-0
> ---
> Early part of
List, please see here an overview and ordering of the ref transaction
patch series.
These series build on each other and needs to be applied in the order
listed below.
This is an update.
rs/ref-transaction-0
---
Early part of the "ref transaction" topic.
* rs/r
List, please see here an overview and ordering of the ref transaction
patch series.
These series build on each other and needs to be applied in the order
listed below.
This is an update.
rs/ref-transaction-0
---
Early part of the "ref transaction" topic.
* rs/r
List, please see here an overview and ordering of the ref transaction
patch series.
These series build on each other and needs to be applied in the order
listed below.
This is an update.
rs/ref-transaction-0
---
Early part of the "ref transaction" topic.
* rs/re
List, please see here an overview and ordering of the ref transaction
patch series.
These series build on each other and needs to be applied in the order
listed below.
rs/ref-transaction-0
---
Early part of the "ref transaction" topic.
* rs/ref-transaction-0:
34 matches
Mail list logo
