Re: [PATCH] ls-tree: add --sparse-filter-oid argument

From: William Sprent <williams@unity3d.com>
Date: Jan 16, 2023, 15:13 UTC
Message-ID: <d085144f-aa98-a79b-d176-2ab6cc7a7289@unity3d.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq8ri62ohd.fsf@gitster.g>

On 13/01/2023 21.01, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
> 
>>>      Note that one of the tests only pass when run on top of commit
>>>      5842710dc2 (dir: check for single file cone patterns, 2023-01-03), which
>>>      was submitted separately and is currently is merged to 'next'.
>>
>> Thanks for mentioning this. It's exactly the sort of information the
>> maintainer needs when applying your patch to his tree. And it can be
>> helpful for reviewers too.
> 
> Indeed it is.  Thanks for pointing it out---I just wish other
> contributors see and follow such a wise piece of advice buried in
> review of a patch by others.

Apropos where to apply the patch: This patch conflicts with the topic 'ls-tree.c: clean-up works'[1], which refactors parts of 'ls-tree.c'. It has recently been merged to 'next' in [2].

Should I go ahead and rebase my changes on top of 'tl/ls-tree-code-clean-up' and then resubmit a new patch, or does it make sure sense to wait?

1: https://public-inbox.org/git/20230112091135.20050-1-tenglong.tl@alibaba-inc.com 2: Commit f7238037fd (Merge branch 'tl/ls-tree-code-clean-up' into next, 2023-01-14)