Re: bug in en/header-split-cache-h-part-3, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2023, #05; Tue, 20)

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Jun 24, 2023, 01:25 UTC
Message-ID: <20230624012555.GD95358@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqr0q2b0cw.fsf@gitster.g>

On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 09:38:07AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Anyway, your rebase of en/header-split-cache-h-part-3, including
> > Dscho's and Peff's changes, all look good to me.
> >
> > Thanks everyone!
> 
> Thanks for confirming.  Let's merge it down to 'next' then.

I did a range-diff between en/header-split-cache-h-part-3{1} and the current tip, and the changes look good to me. It might have been worth mentioning the #ifndef changes in the commit message for e8cf8ef507 (setup: adopt shared init-db & clone code, 2023-05-16). But I see you merged to 'next', and I don't think it's worth going back to change it again.

It's nice when we can get everything in there, but I find that it's not uncommon to sometimes dig extra details out of the list archive if I don't understand part of a change when doing archaeology.

-Peff