Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2020, #04; Mon, 17)

From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 18, 2020, 03:30 UTC
Message-ID: <CABPp-BEFQs4LL0uwkZSpXb_wxo7Wk-gEQSsv-=4B5ja5H1xXTg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq36b8lvdl.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 2:09 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> * en/fill-directory-exponential (2020-01-31) 6 commits
>  - t7063: blindly accept diffs
>  - dir: replace exponential algorithm with a linear one
>  - dir: refactor treat_directory to clarify control flow
>  - dir: fix confusion based on variable tense
>  - dir: fix broken comment
>  - dir: consolidate treat_path() and treat_one_path()
>
>  The directory traversal code had redundant recursive calls which
>  made its performance characteristics exponential wrt the depth of
>  the tree, which was corrected.
>
>  Still RFC?
>  cf. <pull.700.v2.git.git.1580495486.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
>  cf. <CABPp-BF0SO92wxY-dM14Vxv6BGA5=T=CicdwbiaZ7c9w6-j2jQ@mail.gmail.com>

Yes, sorry. I was hoping someone familiar with untracked-cache (or even just the index format) could comment and provide some pointers, but it looks like that won't be happening. I'll try to dig in this week to figure out what to do there.

Show 29 quoted lines

> * en/rebase-backend (2020-02-16) 20 commits
>  - rebase: rename the two primary rebase backends
>  - rebase: change the default backend from "am" to "merge"
>  - rebase: make the backend configurable via config setting
>  - rebase tests: repeat some tests using the merge backend instead of am
>  - rebase tests: mark tests specific to the am-backend with --am
>  - rebase: drop '-i' from the reflog for interactive-based rebases
>  - git-prompt: change the prompt for interactive-based rebases
>  - rebase: add an --am option
>  - rebase: move incompatibility checks between backend options a bit earlier
>  - git-rebase.txt: add more details about behavioral differences of backends
>  - rebase: allow more types of rebases to fast-forward
>  - t3432: make these tests work with either am or merge backends
>  - rebase: fix handling of restrict_revision
>  - rebase: make sure to pass along the quiet flag to the sequencer
>  - rebase, sequencer: remove the broken GIT_QUIET handling
>  - t3406: simplify an already simple test
>  - rebase (interactive-backend): fix handling of commits that become empty
>  - rebase (interactive-backend): make --keep-empty the default
>  - t3404: directly test the behavior of interest
>  - git-rebase.txt: update description of --allow-empty-message
>
>  "git rebase" has learned to use the sequencer backend by default,
>  while allowing "--am" option to go back to the traditional "am"
>  backend.
>
>  The last step may be rushing things a bit and may want to be
>  taken separately.
>  cf. <pull.679.v5.git.git.1581802602.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>

Thanks. I'm curious, though, what you mean by this last bit -- was it just a reflection of my request for folks to comment on whether the last patch was wanted?

In my view, taking the last patch separately does not make sense; it should either be dropped entirely or taken close to the same time as the series. My reasoning for this is as follows: The only place the current backend names exist is in the documentation. The cost of changing the names is thus low. Once this series lands, the backend names will be exposed in the user interface. If we cut a release with those names, then changing the names will require a bunch of transition work. So, if we're going to change the backend names, it'd be better to do it sooner (while the cost is negligible) rather than later.

So far, Phillip has voiced an opinion on this (cf. <e2863381-174c-a55c-bb22-0c7aec9cabf4@gmail.com>) -- "I think it is a good idea - merge and apply make much more sense that interactive and am"; haven't heard from anyone else yet.