From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E56421FC44 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 21:07:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753228AbdBMVHZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:07:25 -0500 Received: from bsmtp7.bon.at ([213.33.87.19]:47698 "EHLO bsmtp7.bon.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752618AbdBMVHX (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:07:23 -0500 Received: from dx.site (unknown [93.83.142.38]) by bsmtp7.bon.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3vMdR93Lvqz5tlm; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:07:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by dx.site (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15E7C2AAA; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:07:16 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH] mingw: use OpenSSL's SHA-1 routines To: Junio C Hamano References: <6a29f8c60d315a24292c1fa9f5e84df4dfdbf813.1486679254.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> <20170210050237.gajicliueuvk6s5d@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170210160458.pcp7mupdz24m6cms@sigill.intra.peff.net> <9913e513-553e-eba6-e81a-9c21030dd767@kdbg.org> Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Hostetler From: Johannes Sixt Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:07:16 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Am 13.02.2017 um 20:42 schrieb Junio C Hamano: > I have been operating under the assumption that everybody on Windows > who builds Git works off of Dscho's Git for Windows tree, and > patches that are specific to Windows from Dscho's are sent to me via > the list only after they have been in Git for Windows and proven to > help Windows users in the wild. > > The consequence of these two assumptions is that I would feel safe > to treat Windows specific changes that do not touch generic part of > the codebase from Dscho just like updates from any other subsystem > maintainers (any git-svn thing from Eric, any gitk thing from Paul, > any p4 thing Luke and Lars are both happy with, etc.). > > You seem to be saying that the first of the two assumptions does not > hold. Should I change my expectations while queuing Windows specific > patches from Dscho? Your first assumption is incorrect as far as I am concerned. I build from your tree plus some topics. During -rc period, I build off of master; after a release, I build off of next. I merge some of the topics that you carry in pu when I find them interesting or when I suspect them to regress on Windows. Then I carry around a few additional patches that the public has never seen, and these days I also merge Dscho's rebase-i topic. -- Hannes