Re: [PATCH 17/19] submodule: use submodule repos for object lookup
- From
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
- Date
- Oct 16, 2018, 23:16 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAGZ79kbNybApS60pvusO0OiLVca+JtN=X3vTG3dHiRDSfoy4yA@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20181016231343.189184-1-jonathantanmy@google.com>
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 4:13 PM Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> > > Thanks for the review of the whole series! > > > > I have redone this series, addressing all your comments. I addressed > > this comment differently than suggested, and put the submodule > > repository argument at the end of the parameter list, such that it > > goes with all the other arguments to be filled in. > > Sounds good.
Actually I changed my mind on that after figuring out how to free the submodule repository appropriately and went with your original suggestion.
Show 9 quoted lines
> > > I was about to resend the series, but test-merged with the other > > submodule series in flight (origin/sb/submodule-recursive-fetch-gets-the-tip) > > which had some conflicts that I can easily resolve by rebasing on top. > > I presume you are talking about [1]? Maybe consider rebasing that one on > top of this instead, since this is just a refactoring whereas > submodule-recursive-fetch-gets-the-tip changes functionality, from what > I understand of patches 8 and 9.
From my understanding, that series is further along than this one, so I would not want to mix up their order.
Currently I am rebasing this on top of select topics from next, (ds/reachable) as that are the other conflicts that I'd have to deal with.
Show 13 quoted lines
> [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/20181016181327.107186-1-sbeller@google.com/
>
> > It conflicts a lot when merging to next, due to the latest patch
> > ("Apply semantic patches from previous patches"), so I am not sure
> > how to proceed properly. Maybe we'd omit that patch and
> > run 'make coccicheck' on next to apply the semantic patches
> > there instead.
>
> Omitting the patch sounds good to me. For me, just stating that you have
> excluded any coccinelle-generated patches in order to ease merging into
> the various branches is sufficient, and people can test the coccinelle
> patches included by running "make coccicheck" then "patch -p1
> <contrib/coccinelle/the_repository.cocci.patch".ok.
Thanks, Stefan