Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2019, #03; Fri, 18)

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:

>>  On hold.
>>  cf. <CABPp-BFckuONYcGGkCY3BuPypRULmhsk_OFHyYA2E4jM66BfeQ@mail.gmail.com>
>
> Is the "on hold" comment still accurate?

Not anymore.  Back when I wrote it it was unclear to me what the
best way forward was (e.g. should one become dependent on the other
topic?  is it something I can carry a semantic conflict resolution
for, in order to keep the option open to be able to merge one
without the other topic?).  Now the answer is in 'pu' and after
seeing the "Has this been resolved itself?" from Dscho, I checked
the semantic conflict resolution I have can be used when the topics
are merged to 'next' or 'master' by making trial merges, so I think
we are in good shape.

I think these two topics by themselves were both good enough to be
in 'next' for wider testing, as I do not recall any remaning issues
in the code or docs in the patches (please correct me if it is not
the case).

Thanks.