From: D. Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 22:06:47 GMT
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2025, #07; Sun, 23)
Message-ID: <CALnO6CA4N5yC3oHmtihdyB5mprB_GMbfiLgi+XeY5DyGK97Pcw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqtsyjxp63.fsf@gitster.g>

On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 1:26 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> "D. Ben Knoble" <ben.knoble@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Nov 23, 2025 at 11:59 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> >> --------------------------------------------------
> >> [New Topics]
> >>
> >> * jc/optional-path (2025-11-20) 3 commits
> >>  - config: really treat missing optional path as not configured
> >>  - config: really pretend missing :(optional) value is not there
> >>  - config: mark otherwise unused function as file-scope static
> >>
> >>  "git config get --path" segfaulted on an ":(optional)path" that
> >>  does not exist, which has been corrected.
> >>
> >>  Will merge to 'next'?
> >>  source: <xmqqikf47ajk.fsf@gitster.g>
> >
> > Any interest in also marking this for 2.52.1? It's unlikely to be used
> > much yet, but since the segfault affects several invocations (git
> > blame, etc.) it will be irritating to folks who try the recently
> > released version.
>
> Yes, this is a clear regression-fix material.  The branch you are
> commenting on is designed to be merge-able anywhere the original
> topic that had the segfault can be (or has been) merged, by building
> directly on top of ccfcaf39 (parseopt: values of pathname type can
> be prefixed with :(optional), 2025-09-28), which was the tip of the
> original topic.

I noticed a .1 was never released. I'm not sure what the
protocol/process/etiquette is, but figured I'd bump this in your inbox
;)

I saw your other recent mail about family things, so no rush of course.

-- 
D. Ben Knoble