{"thread":{"id":"43577","subject":"What's cooking in git.git","startedAt":"2006-12-13T21:38:00Z","lastAt":"2006-12-13T21:38:00Z","messageCount":1,"participants":["Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"295635","messageId":"7vwt4veatj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"43577","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"What's cooking in git.git","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2006-12-13T21:38:00Z","receivedAt":"2006-12-13T21:38:00Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"I think the last issue in \"consolidated topic listing\" format\nwas a success, so this is in the same format.  In the following\nlisting, a commit in 'next' has '+' in front, and the ones only\nin 'pu' have '-' in front.  The date after each topic name is\nthe last time the topic was touched.\n\n* jc/diff--cached (Wed Dec 13 01:33:43 2006 -0800) 1 commit\n + Revert \"git-diff: Introduce --index and deprecate --cached.\"\n\nWill merge to 'master' shortly and will be in v1.5.0.\n\n* jc/git-add--interactive (Mon Dec 11 17:09:26 2006 -0800) 2 commits\n - git-add --interactive: hunk splitting\n - git-add --interactive\n\nUndecided.  Either drop it altogether or merge it to 'next'\nafter adding 'edit' interface to the index contents.\n\n* jn/web (Sun Dec 10 13:25:49 2006 +0100) 5 commits\n + gitweb: SHA-1 in commit log message links to \"object\" view\n + gitweb: Hyperlink target of symbolic link in \"tree\" view (if\n   possible)\n + gitweb: Add generic git_object subroutine to display object of any\n   type\n + gitweb: Show target of symbolic link in \"tree\" view\n + gitweb: Don't use Content-Encoding: header in git_snapshot\n\nHaven't looked at them fully, but likely to be in v1.5.0.\n\n* jc/blame-boundary (Fri Dec 1 20:45:45 2006 -0800) 1 commit\n + git-blame: show lines attributed to boundary commits differently.\n\nThis does not break gitweb nor git-cvsserver because they have\nno way to specify boundary commits.  Likely to be in v1.5.0.\n\nLater we can update gitweb to allow specifying the range and\nhandle 'boundary' annotations in a special way.\n\n* jc/explain (Mon Dec 4 19:35:04 2006 -0800) 1 commit\n - git-explain\n\nWe probably should come up with a unified way to allow various\ncommands that can leave the working tree into special states to\ncommunicate with each other first.  Will NOT be in v1.5.0.\n\n* jc/patch-inline-comments (Fri Dec 8 21:03:52 2006 -0800) 1 commit\n - mailinfo: hack to accept in-line annotations in patches.\n\nWill drop.\n\n* sv/git-svn (Tue Dec 5 16:17:38 2006 +1100) 5 commits\n - git-svn: re-map repository URLs and UUIDs on SVK mirror paths\n - git-svn: collect revision properties when fetching\n - git-svn: collect SVK source URL on mirror paths\n - git-svn: let libsvn_ls_fullurl return properties too\n - git-svn: make test for SVK mirror path import\n\nSam Villain's SVN fixes are queued in 'pu' but the series hasn't\nseen updates after Eric commented on them.  Still on hold.\n\n* jc/3way (Wed Nov 29 18:53:13 2006 -0800) 1 commit\n + git-merge: preserve and merge local changes when doing fast\n   forward\n\nThis does the magic unconditionally which I am not 100% happy\nabout, because the resulting mess could be too large to handle.\nOn the other hand, the user deserves what he gets if he starts a\nmerge from wildly unclean state, so it may not be too much of an\nissue.  Undecided.\n\n* jc/leftright (Sun Oct 22 17:32:47 2006 -0700) 1 commit\n - rev-list --left-right\n\nI think this needs a better UI integration into 'git log' and\nfriends, not just rev-list.  Currently, I can say:\n\n  $ git rev-list --no-merges --left-right --pretty v1.4.4.2...master\n\nbut that still misses --stat and --patch output.  If people find\nthis useful, maybe we would want to merge it to 'next' after\nadding the option to log and friends (or turn it on\nautomatically when symmetric difference is used).\n\n* js/shallow (Fri Nov 24 16:00:13 2006 +0100) 15 commits\n + fetch-pack: Do not fetch tags for shallow clones.\n + get_shallow_commits: Avoid memory leak if a commit has been\n   reached already.\n + git-fetch: Reset shallow_depth before auto-following tags.\n + upload-pack: Check for NOT_SHALLOW flag before sending a shallow\n   to the client.\n + fetch-pack: Properly remove the shallow file when it becomes\n   empty.\n + shallow clone: unparse and reparse an unshallowed commit\n + Why didn't we mark want_obj as ~UNINTERESTING in the old code?\n + Why does it mean we do not have to register shallow if we have\n   one?\n + We should make sure that the protocol is still extensible.\n + add tests for shallow stuff\n + Shallow clone: do not ignore shallowness when following tags\n + allow deepening of a shallow repository\n + allow cloning a repository \"shallowly\"\n + support fetching into a shallow repository\n + upload-pack: no longer call rev-list\n\nThe 'shallow clone'.  Most likely post v1.5.0.\n\n* jc/web (Wed Nov 8 14:54:09 2006 -0800) 1 commit\n - gitweb: steal loadavg throttle from kernel.org\n\nIf somebody steps up to maintain the gitweb installation at\nkernel.org, merging this would make one less thing to customize\nthere.  Undecided.\n\n* jc/pickaxe (Sun Nov 5 11:52:43 2006 -0800) 1 commit\n - blame: --show-stats for easier optimization work.\n\nThis is developer-only; will hold.\n\n* jc/diff (Mon Sep 25 23:03:34 2006 -0700) 1 commit\n - para-walk: walk n trees, index and working tree in parallel\n\nBackburnered and will continue to hold.  I suspect unpack-trees\nlogic that is used by read-tree would turn out to be too\ncumbersome to optimize and at that point this might become\nuseful.\n\n* jc/diff-apply-patch (Fri Sep 22 16:17:58 2006 -0700) 1 commit\n + git-diff/git-apply: make diff output a bit friendlier to GNU patch\n   (part 2)\n\nWill hold until February.\n"}]}