threads / discuss / 30190

Post 1.7.10 cycle

Subject: Post 1.7.10 cycle

## tl;dr

2 messages between Apr 10, 2012 and Apr 10, 2012.

replies: 1people: 2as markdown or json

Junio C Hamano· Apr 10, 2012, 00:22 UTC · lore

It's now time to pick among the topics that have been cooking in 'next' and 'pu' which ones to start moving to 'master' in what order.

I've already kicked one topic out of 'next' as it regresses the http proxy support, but I haven't spent enough time to look at the other topics again closely enough to decide. I was hoping that we could feed a handful of topics every few days to 'master'.

I think the following topics (in 'next') are more or less ready:

da/difftool-test jn/diffstat-tests jc/commit-hook-authorship tr/maint-word-diff-regex-sticky rs/unpack-trees-leakfix jc/diff-algo-cleanup nd/stream-more zj/test-cred-helper-nicer-prove nl/rebase-i-cheat-sheet jc/maint-clean-nested-worktree-in-subdir jh/notes-merge-in-git-dir-worktree

These (in 'next') are "ready" code-wise, but we would need to see the end of the "upstream", "current" or "beginner" discussion:

ct/advise-push-default mm/push-default-switch-warning

And I think these in 'pu' are ready for 'next':

jk/diff-no-rename-empty rs/combine-diff-zero-context-at-the-beginning jc/commit-unedited-template jk/http-backend-keep-committer-ident-env jc/push-upstream-sanity jk/branch-quiet jc/run-hook-env-1 sl/autoconf jb/am-include jc/am-report-3way jc/fmt-merge-msg-people wk/gitweb-snapshot-use-if-modified-since bw/spawn-via-shell-path it/fetch-pack-many-refs jn/debian-customizes-default-editor jk/add-p-skip-conflicts

Others not listed here fall into one of the following categories:

 (1) known to be incomplete;
 (2) stalled;
 (3) I simply haven't stared at them long enough; or
 (4) I don't have strong opinion in the area in general.

I'll do a proper "What's cooking" later tonight or tomorrow.

René Scharfe· Apr 10, 2012, 18:55 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: Post 1.7.10 cycle

Am 10.04.2012 02:22, schrieb Junio C Hamano:

Show 9 quoted lines

> It's now time to pick among the topics that have been cooking in 'next'
> and 'pu' which ones to start moving to 'master' in what order.
> 
> I've already kicked one topic out of 'next' as it regresses the http proxy
> support, but I haven't spent enough time to look at the other topics again
> closely enough to decide.  I was hoping that we could feed a handful of
> topics every few days to 'master'.
> 
> I think the following topics (in 'next') are more or less ready:

> rs/unpack-trees-leakfix

Please apply the following patch before this one. It makes sure that it is a pure leak fix. Without the added check, it'd change the behaviour slightly: with o->merge == 0, we'd call mark_ce_used() on src[0]; before it would point to the leaked version, but after the patch it points to the version that has been added using do_add_entry(). Not sure if this can lead to any user-visible consequences, but this is cleaner.

-- >8 --
Subject: unpack-trees: don't perform any index operation if we're not merging

src[0] points to the index entry in the merge case and to the first tree to unpack in the non-merge case. We only want to mark the index entry, so check first if we're merging.

Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
---
 unpack-trees.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
index 7c9ecf6..60b728e 100644
--- a/unpack-trees.c
+++ b/unpack-trees.c
@@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ static int unpack_callback(int n, unsigned long mask, unsigned long dirmask, str
 	if (unpack_nondirectories(n, mask, dirmask, src, names, info) < 0)
 		return -1;
 
-	if (src[0]) {
+	if (o->merge && src[0]) {
 		if (ce_stage(src[0]))
 			mark_ce_used_same_name(src[0], o);
 		else

-- 
1.7.10