Re: whither merge-tree?

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 24, 2016, 07:58 UTC
Message-ID: <20160224075849.GB12511@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <56CC2B2E.6070203@uni-graz.at>

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:49:34AM +0100, Stefan Frühwirth wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> On 23.02.2016 at 06:02 Jeff King wrote:
> >>Let's wait and see how many "please don't"s we hear, perhaps, before
> >>deciding to go 3.?
> >
> >I'm guessing we won't see much either way. Even Stefan, the original
> >reporter, does not seem to actively be using it, but rather relaying a
> >report.
> 
> I _am_ actively using it. Maybe I was unclear on that topic. I'm in favour
> of keeping it, because this means I don't have to rewrite Chris' Code in
> order to be able to use the Python library that uses merge-tree (Acidfs).
> But as a sensible human being I want what's best in the long run. I leave
> that up to you as I have no way of assessing that.

Ah, sorry for the confusion. I had thought you were just relaying bugs on behalf of acidfs folks, but it makes sense that you are using it indirectly through the library.

> So that's a "please don't" leave the code as-is but provide a (transitional)
> solution that fixes the reported bug and has the best chances of not causing
> any more headaches :)

I think the series I posted does what you want, then, and we can stop short of deprecating for now.

-Peff