Re: [PATCH v5 00/27] Prepare the sequencer for the upcoming rebase -i patches

From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Date: Oct 24, 2016, 19:36 UTC
Message-ID: <CAGZ79kaq85c1Gk1aRSrdQGp1Nm9p6tN0jXbFvTN0v+9ehooxYg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqinsk8g1b.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

>
> There isn't enough time to include this topic in the upcoming
> release within the current https://tinyurl.com/gitCal calendar,
> however, which places the final on Nov 11th.
>
> I am wondering if it makes sense to delay 2.11 by moving the final
> by 4 weeks to Dec 9th.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Speaking of what to and not to include in the upcoming release, we
> do want to include Stefan's off-by-one fix to the submodule-helper,
> but that is blocked on Windows end due to the test.

I'd be happy either way, i.e. we could revert that fix and make a release? AFAICT, Windows only has broken tests, not broken functionality with that submodule bug fix.

Show 8 quoted lines

> I think
> everybody agreed that a longer time "right thing to do" fix is to
> address the "when base is /path/to/dir/., where is ../sub relative
> to it?" issue, but if we are to do so, it would need a longer
> gestation period once it hits 'next', as it can affect the current
> users and we may even need B/C notes in the release notes for the
> change.  Giving ourselves a few more weeks of breathing room would
> help us to make sure the fix to relative URL issue is sound, too.

If we want a longer gestation period, we'd ideally merge it to master just after a release, such that we "cook" it in master without having it in any release (we had a similar discussion for the diff heuristics IIRC).

So please don't let the release schedule depend on my ability to deliver a proper patch for the submodule path issue.

Thanks, Stefan