Re: What's cooking in git.git (topics)

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jun 3, 2007, 00:20 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706030114540.4046@racer.site>
In-Reply-To: <7v6466oygl.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Hi,

On Sat, 2 Jun 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> * lh/submodules (Sat Jun 2 03:27:42 2007 +0200) 2 commits
>  + Add basic test-script for git-submodule
>  + Add git-submodule command
> 
> I find this a 'master' material already.  Will merge soon.

I agree. Even if I had not time to review it closely, from a cursory look it is clean enough. I don't expect any regressions from that.

Show 5 quoted lines

> * pb/am (Thu May 24 19:25:25 2007 -0700) 2 commits
>  + Remove git-applypatch
>  + git-applymbox: Remove command
> 
> Will push out to 'master' soon to see if anybody screams.

Ack.

Show 5 quoted lines

> * jc/diff (Mon Dec 25 01:08:50 2006 -0800) 2 commits
>  - test-para: combined diff between HEAD, index and working tree.
>  - para-walk: walk n trees, index and working tree in parallel
> 
> Backburnered.

I actually like those two commits, and I always wanted to work on top of these, but my new boss keeps me away from Git :-(

Will review, and try to work some more on them in the next three weeks. Don't drop them!

As for the complicated source code: I cannot agree. If you have _any_ idea about what data structures are about, you will readily recognize what it is about. We _could_ be more explicit, but by a huge margin.

(IMHO too many people try to chime in without _any_ clue about the difference of hash tables and binary search, and no notion of Landau's symbol. We should not necessarily try to accomodate people who are _that_ unwilling to work up their theory.)

Ciao, Dscho