Re: 2.11.0-rc1 will not be tagged for a few days

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 06:32:05PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> I regret to report that I won't be able to tag 2.11-rc1 as scheduled
> in tinyurl.com/gitCal (I am feverish and my brain is not keeping
> track of things correctly) any time soon.  I'll report back an
> updated schedule when able.

Take your time. Even if we end up bumping the release by a whole week, I
don't think it's a big deal (which seems likely given the holiday in the
middle, unless you really want to release on Thanksgiving).

> found on the list.  I am aware of only two right now ("cast enum to
> int to work around compiler warning", in Dscho's prepare sequencer
> series, and "wc -l may give leading whitespace" fix J6t pointed out
> in Lars's filter process series), but it is more than likely that I
> am missing a few more.

In addition to J6t's fix in t0021, we need mine that you queued in
jk/filter-process-fix.

I think we also need to make a final decision on the indent/compaction
heuristic naming. After reading Michael's [0], and the claim by you and
Stefan that the "compaction" name was declared sufficiently experimental
that we could later take it away, I'm inclined to follow this plan:

  1. Ship v2.11 with what is in master; i.e., both compaction and indent
     heuristics, triggerable by config or command line.

  2. Post-v2.11, retire the compaction heuristic as a failed experiment.
     Keeping it in v2.11 doesn't hurt anything (it was already
     released), and lets us take our time coming up with and cooking the
     patch.

  3. Post-v2.11, flip the default for diff.indentHeuristic to "true".
     Keep at least the command line option around indefinitely for
     experimenting (i.e., "this diff looks funny; I wonder if
     --no-indent-heuristic makes it look better").

     Config option can either stay or go at that point. I have no
     preference.

The nice thing about that plan is it punts on merging any new code to
post-v2.11. :)

Another possible regression came up today in [1]. I haven't worked up a
patch yet, but I'll do so in the next day or so.

I think that's where we're at now. I'll keep collecting and can give you
the full list when you're back in action.

Get well.

[0] http://public-inbox.org/git/8dbbd28b-af60-5e66-ae27-d7cddca233dc@alum.mit.edu/

[1] http://public-inbox.org/git/20161108003034.apydvv3bav3s7ehq@sigill.intra.peff.net/