Message ID | cover.1701243201.git.ps@pks.im (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | refs: improve handling of special refs | expand |
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 09:14:07AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > Patrick Steinhardt (4): > wt-status: read HEAD and ORIG_HEAD via the refdb > refs: propagate errno when reading special refs fails > refs: complete list of special refs > bisect: consistently write BISECT_EXPECTED_REV via the refdb > > bisect.c | 25 +++------------ > builtin/bisect.c | 8 ++--- > refs.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > t/t1403-show-ref.sh | 9 ++++++ > t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 2 +- > wt-status.c | 17 +++++----- > 6 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) These all look pretty good to me. I had a few minor questions on the first three patches, but I don't think they necessarily require a reroll. Thanks, Taylor
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 05:14:39PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 09:14:07AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > Patrick Steinhardt (4): > > wt-status: read HEAD and ORIG_HEAD via the refdb > > refs: propagate errno when reading special refs fails > > refs: complete list of special refs > > bisect: consistently write BISECT_EXPECTED_REV via the refdb > > > > bisect.c | 25 +++------------ > > builtin/bisect.c | 8 ++--- > > refs.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > t/t1403-show-ref.sh | 9 ++++++ > > t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 2 +- > > wt-status.c | 17 +++++----- > > 6 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) > > These all look pretty good to me. I had a few minor questions on the > first three patches, but I don't think they necessarily require a > reroll. I agree that none of the comments really require a reroll, but I'll address them if there will be another iteration of this patch series. Thanks for your review! Patrick
On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 08:46:54AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 05:14:39PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote: > > These all look pretty good to me. I had a few minor questions on the > > first three patches, but I don't think they necessarily require a > > reroll. > > I agree that none of the comments really require a reroll, but I'll > address them if there will be another iteration of this patch series. > > Thanks for your review! No problem on either. I doubt that there will be another iteration of this series since it is already good, so no need to worry too much about these changes. Thanks, Taylor