Re: Evaluation of ref-api branch status

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Dec 6, 2011, 06:57 UTC
Message-ID: <7vzkf6gpat.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <4EDDAC4A.4030805@alum.mit.edu>

Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:

Show 9 quoted lines

> On 12/05/2011 07:26 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> ...
>> My reading of your summary suggests that it would be easiest to drop the
>> three mh/ref-api* topics from my tree, especially the 'refs: loosen
>> over-strict "format" check' band-aid patches, and re-queue a re-roll from
>> you.
>
> OK, then, I will try to re-roll the series on top of master, and build
> the equivalent of your quick-fix into the logical point in the series.

These quick-fixes were necessary _only_ because the queued topics predate the real fix already in 1.7.8 (and I generally refuse to criss cross merge from master to topics), so I expect you won't need their equivalents if the topic is rebased on top of 1.7.8

> ... How much time to I have to work on this
> while still leaving enough time to comfortably integrate it into 1.7.9?

I am hoping we can have rc0 very early next year [*1*].

[Reference]

*1* https://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=jfgbl2mrlipp4pb6ieih0qr3so%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/Los_Angeles