Re: problem with insider build for windows and git

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jan 19, 2017, 19:54 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701192032330.3469@virtualbox>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq8tq8b4mr.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

Hi Junio,

On Wed, 18 Jan 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Aside from the "ouch, one topic has merged earlier iteration, that
> was merged to 'master', also now merged to 'maint', and we need to
> follow up on both" you sent out earlier,

I know of one more "ouch" moment where my latest iterations did not get picked up: my latest version of the "Avoid a segmentation fault with renaming merges" patch did not output an error message in case of !nce because the code flow will result in more appropriate error messages later anyway. I did not provide a follow-up patch for that because the current version in `maint` is not wrong per se.

> are there any other topic that are already in 'master' that should go to
> 2.11.x track?

Personally, I would have merged 'nd/config-misc-fixes' into `maint`, I guess, and 'jc/abbrev-autoscale-config', and probably also 'jc/latin-1'. The 'rj/git-version-gen-do-not-force-abbrev' topic would be another candidate for inclusion. The 'ah/grammos' strikes me as obvious `maint` material, as well as 'ew/svn-fixes'. I have no opinion on the p4 topics (five, by my counting), as I have no experience with (or for that matter, need for) Perforce, but Lars might have a strong opinion on those.

Having said that, these are the topics that *I* would merge into `maint` if I maintained Git. I don't, so this is just my opinion, man [*1*].

Ciao, Johannes

Footnote *1*: While you read that last part of the sentence, imagine me in slippers and a bathrobe, with a White Russian in my left hand for which I used milk instead of cream (for the White Russian, that is, not for my left hand).