Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2021, #08; Mon, 27)
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Sep 28, 2021, 17:16 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqo88clixa.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <CABPp-BGuzd_TH57-1RvwJQD5r3S3ZkJcuiPnU8aWee8pgzUBEw@mail.gmail.com>
Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
>> * js/scalar (2021-09-14) 15 commits > ... > However, since Johannes has been away for a couple weeks, maybe give > him a chance to return and respond to myself and others (and perhaps > push any updates that occurred to him while on vacation) before > merging down?
Fair enough.
Show 17 quoted lines
>> * en/remerge-diff (2021-08-31) 7 commits >> - doc/diff-options: explain the new --remerge-diff option >> - show, log: provide a --remerge-diff capability >> - tmp-objdir: new API for creating and removing primary object dirs >> - merge-ort: capture and print ll-merge warnings in our preferred fashion >> - ll-merge: add API for capturing warnings in a strbuf instead of stderr >> - merge-ort: add ability to record conflict messages in a file >> - merge-ort: mark a few more conflict messages as omittable >> >> A new presentation for two-parent merge "--remerge-diff" can be >> used to show the difference between mechanical (and possibly >> conflicted) merge results and the recorded resolution. >> >> Will merge to 'next'? > > It has been a month that it's been cooking with no issues brought up, > and it's been in production for nearly a year...
Please do not read that much for being in "seen". Until a topic hits 'next', where some orgs package and ship to their internal audience, I am not sure if it can be called "cooking".
But your using it on your folks in the production (how big is your audience, I don't know) does count ;-)
Show 6 quoted lines
> But just this morning I pinged peff and jrnieder if they might have > time to respectively look at the tmp-objdir stuff (patch 5, plus its > integration into log-tree.c in patch 7) and the ll-merge.[ch] changes > (patch 3). I don't know if either will have time to do it, but > perhaps wait half a week or so to see if they'll mention they have > time?
Sure.