Message ID | cover.1639524556.git.steadmon@google.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | branch: inherit tracking configs | expand |
On 2021.12.14 15:44, Josh Steadmon wrote: > Changes since V5: > * Greatly simplified BRANCH_CONFIG_VERBOSE output to not require nearly > so many conditionals. I meant to expand on this but forgot before sending the series. I removed as many distinctions as possible, as most can still be inferred from context. For example, previously the output specifically called out branches vs. tags, but this is obvious in the name itself: "some-branch" vs. "refs/tags/some-tag" for example. Likewise, we don't need to specify whether refs are remote or local: "some-remote/some-branch" vs. "a-local-branch" should be understandable without us spelling it out. Of course, if people feel like I've over-simplified here, I'm happy to revert this change.
Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com> writes: > Changes since V5: > * Greatly simplified BRANCH_CONFIG_VERBOSE output to not require nearly > so many conditionals. > * Note that rebasing is not compatible with inheriting multiple upstream > branches. > * Moved the change to case-sensitivity for branch.autosetupmerge to its > own commit. > * Improve advice on failed tracking setup when multiple branches are > involved. > * Make better use of string_list API. > * Make better use of config API. > * More straight-forward use of the `struct tracking` API. > * Numerous style fixes. I've queued this, and rebased Glen's "branch --recurse-submodules" on top, and parked both of them near the tip of 'seen'. I do not have much confidence in the conflict resolution needed during the rebasing or the other branch or merges into 'seen', and I would appreciate it if you two can take a look to sanity check the result. Thanks.
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com> writes: > >> Changes since V5: >> * Greatly simplified BRANCH_CONFIG_VERBOSE output to not require nearly >> so many conditionals. >> * Note that rebasing is not compatible with inheriting multiple upstream >> branches. >> * Moved the change to case-sensitivity for branch.autosetupmerge to its >> own commit. >> * Improve advice on failed tracking setup when multiple branches are >> involved. >> * Make better use of string_list API. >> * Make better use of config API. >> * More straight-forward use of the `struct tracking` API. >> * Numerous style fixes. > > I've queued this, and rebased Glen's "branch --recurse-submodules" > on top, and parked both of them near the tip of 'seen'. I do not > have much confidence in the conflict resolution needed during the > rebasing or the other branch or merges into 'seen', and I would > appreciate it if you two can take a look to sanity check the result. > > Thanks. I've just sent out a new version [1] which is rebased on top of Josh's v6. Please use that version instead :) I did not rebase this on top of 'seen' though; I'll take a look and see if there's anything of concern. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20211216003213.99135-1-chooglen@google.com/,
Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com> writes: > I did not rebase this on top of 'seen' though; I'll take a look and see > if there's anything of concern. That's OK; please do not ever rebase anything on top of 'seen' or 'next'. In this particular case, you and Josh agreed to base your topic on top of Josh'es, if I understand it correctly, so find the tip of js/branch-track-inherit from 'seen' [*] and rebase your topic there. But making a trial merge of the combined topic to say 'next' and testing the result out before sending the patches to the list would be very much appreciated ;-) [Footnote] * One way to do so would be: $ git fetch $ git show 'remote/origin/seen^{/^Merge branch .js/branch-track-inherit.}'