Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2019, #04; Tue, 15)

[Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>]

Hi Elijah,

On Tue, 15 Oct 2019, Elijah Newren wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 2:04 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> > * en/fast-imexport-nested-tags (2019-10-04) 8 commits
> >   (merged to 'next' on 2019-10-07 at 3e75779e10)
> >  + fast-export: handle nested tags
> >  + t9350: add tests for tags of things other than a commit
> >  + fast-export: allow user to request tags be marked with --mark-tags
> >  + fast-export: add support for --import-marks-if-exists
> >  + fast-import: add support for new 'alias' command
> >  + fast-import: allow tags to be identified by mark labels
> >  + fast-import: fix handling of deleted tags
> >  + fast-export: fix exporting a tag and nothing else
> >
> >  Updates to fast-import/export.
>
> Thanks!
>
> > * en/merge-recursive-directory-rename-fixes (2019-10-12) 2 commits
> >   (merged to 'next' on 2019-10-15 at ebfdc3ff7b)
> >  + merge-recursive: fix merging a subdirectory into the root directory
> >  + merge-recursive: clean up get_renamed_dir_portion()
> >
> >  A few glitches in the heuristic in merge-recursive to infer file
> >  movements based on movements of other files in the same directory
> >  have been corrected.
> >
> >  Will merge to 'master'.
>
> I'm surprised this one was merged straight down to next; perhaps I
> should have highlighted my plans a bit clearer in the thread?  I did
> mention (at the end of an email) at [1], that
>
> "Oh, and I think there's another place in the code that needs to be
> tweaked to make sure we handle renaming subdirectories into the root
> directory that I missed (and just wasn't tested by this testcase), so
> I'll check into it and if so fix the code and add another testcase,
> and include the fixups I agreed to above and send out a v2.  Probably
> won't get to it until the middle of next week, though."
>
> So, I guess I'll submit a fixup patch on top instead, either later
> today or tomorrow.
>
> Also, a very minor point but "glitches" may be misleading; it suggests
> (to me at least) a malfunction rather than a failure to trigger, and
> it's really only the special case of renaming/merging of a directory
> into the root directory that the previous heuristics failed to detect.
> The rest of the fixes were make-the-code-clearer (there were a couple
> places in the code that were technically correct but quite misleading
> and hard to reason about).

I also offered several comments that the regression tests could be
condensed into easier-to-understand ones.

Ciao,
Dscho

> [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/CABPp-BFNCLJnt4NgFKVxURBGD1Z00gastc5q4ZPjcHmwS=kuFw@mail.gmail.com/
>