From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2009 21:33:36 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/3] Export thread-safe version of 'has_symlink_leading_path()'
Message-ID: <7vfxd1lh73.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <86r5wmvk17.fsf@broadpark.no>

Kjetil Barvik <barvik@broadpark.no> writes:

>   I have looked at and tested (the version from the origin/pu branch, so
>   it contains the memset() line squashed in) patch 5/3, 6/3 and 7/3, and
>   all 3 patches looks correct, so you can add
>
>      Reviewed-and-tested-by: Kjetil Barvik
>
>   if you want to.

Thanks.

>   But, I guess it is me which is a litle late to comment things, since I
>   already see that all 3 patches is in the pu, next and master branches
>   already, less than 3 days after beeing posted to the malinglist.
>
>   But, would'nt it be a good thing to let all patches at least be in the
>   pu branch for minimum x days before entering next and master?  Or: let
>   it go minimum x days after beeing posted to the list before entering
>   the next and master branch?  x = 4?

That number x depends on the quality of the patches and to a great extent
how well I know the area of the code affected by the patch.