Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] First steps towards partial clone submodules

From: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Date: Jun 9, 2021, 04:58 UTC
Message-ID: <20210609045804.2329079-1-jonathantanmy@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABPp-BGL3L5uReVHtSUsNJ7fYgBV_Us5ZYv7e9FPHT2DuY-dyg@mail.gmail.com>

Show 12 quoted lines

> Looks like Junio did spot some bigger items...which raises a question
> for me.  I have a series
> (https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.969.git.1622856485.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/)
> that also touches partial clones.  Our series are semantically
> independent, but we both add a repository parameter to
> fetch_objects().  So we both make the same change, but you also make
> additional nearby changes, resulting in two trivial conflicts.  So,
> should I rebase my series on yours, should you rebase on mine, or
> should we just let both proceed independently and double-check Junio
> resolves the trivial conflicts in favor of your side?
> 
> Thoughts?

From [1], looks like this is already resolved, but in any case I think we can just let both proceed independently since the conflicts are relatively trivial. If it turns out to be not so trivial, I think Junio can just let one of us know on-list and whoever it is can rebase on the other's.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqlf7jnb5u.fsf@gitster.g/