Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2018, #02; Tue, 11)

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sep 12, 2018, 07:13 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqo9d3mbn0.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <8951536.UanLVthjk7@thunderbird>

Stephen & Linda Smith <ischis2@cox.net> writes:

Show 20 quoted lines

> On Tuesday, September 11, 2018 3:20:19 PM MST Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> 
>> * jc/wt-status-state-cleanup (2018-09-07) 1 commit
>>  - WIP: roll wt_status_state into wt_status and populate in the collect
>> phase (this branch uses ss/wt-status-committable.)
>> 
>> * ss/wt-status-committable (2018-09-07) 4 commits
>>  - wt-status.c: set the committable flag in the collect phase
>>  - t7501: add test of "commit --dry-run --short"
>>  - wt-status: rename commitable to committable
>>  - wt-status.c: move has_unmerged earlier in the file
>>  (this branch is used by jc/wt-status-state-cleanup.)
>> 
>
> I note that the jc/wt-status-state-cleanup branch is a patch "for illustration 
> purposes only" [1].
>
> I was about to update that patch to start dealing with the free() function 
> calls, but noted you added the patch.  Do you want me to take that patch and 
> continue on?  Or does someone else have something in progress?

I do not plan to. In general, anything that is only in 'pu' is a fair game---when a better alternative appears, or a discussion leads to a conclusion that a change is unneeded, they are replaced and/or discarded. Just think of them as being kept slightly better record of existence than merely being in the list archive, nothing more.