From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 23:29:51 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/14] lockfile: introduce flag for locks outside .git
Message-ID: <20141203232951.GJ6527@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqr3wguxhv.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

> I tried to merge the 14-patch series with obvious fix-ups after
> dropping the rerere abortion change you sent separately and in
> duplicate and also dropping sb/copy-fd, but I've ran out of patience
> with this step, at least for today's integration cycle.  Should we
> also drop jk/lock-ref-sha1-basec-return-errors topic as well?

I don't mind adding it to the series.  Or feel free to hold off on
picking up this 14-patch series until tomorrow's reroll.  (Helping
with today's integration was why I was thinking of re-sending.  I
should have been clearer about saying that I prefer you don't pick
this up yet when I decided to give reviewers a little more time.)

> The 14-patch series may have been internally consistent and its
> individual patches, when each of them was taken alone by itself, may
> have made sense, but it appears that the aggregated whole these
> separate topics took their root from is inconsistent with itself
> in minor ways like this here and there X-<.

I don't follow.  It's normal for an API change to affect code that
uses the API --- what inconsistency are you talking about here?

Puzzled,
Jonathan