From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08F071F466 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 23:04:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726594AbgA1XE1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jan 2020 18:04:27 -0500 Received: from mail-yb1-f201.google.com ([209.85.219.201]:45676 "EHLO mail-yb1-f201.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726565AbgA1XE0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jan 2020 18:04:26 -0500 Received: by mail-yb1-f201.google.com with SMTP id b144so11458746ybg.12 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 15:04:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:subject:from:to :cc; bh=WTaqTQCNpgd7j2DHr2C1yMS5kMrXClnOVLTxvvaG3zc=; b=m8LuViPZgag0h1DXCcxjW2eEkKdYHIgpGTMQAdRvl0+ZNmNv6XerrNEioz1UNQVHAz KdxxzOjtMMoDFTzvDtDk0mI1sR0xPVdBnOluN7aI6kv/IdFqbeUy6XzVFNQxFsg3Dyxn DfHcM0UbclkvduPgMq1JYrTYPBwE8+2fuJXGxcQ0fnjM22t89bM5p0CfsqnXYRpmc/L0 xDqiDx5HT0YoSDM8YGMWqcCpKi/avA/fQtdtsjx193UZyUBIT5plMNF8A0iK+k32k9k9 Ke8FZz5x7klxsABcbHWRjNRdSCbIEH0XYnQ2O4QsQkAM1H5sWT8W7gKYcNcng1xfo6u2 SD2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:from:to:cc; bh=WTaqTQCNpgd7j2DHr2C1yMS5kMrXClnOVLTxvvaG3zc=; b=TMMHkO1TBemjOhQFHpb9Nwr0AwhU/K9dqbKPJHJTpOqRO4yTj4DFdAtZFCKItgz78O +jjhC79VK2ZdWBmOVG2Jj4l/a2ukzl1OxfNREfKPg5iy3lb3LqIEQ3wT1DV4mYRj5577 FqsbfA6SNowL5ZQgfMiIphX2KIDKKFLCpW7kKW7jtcS89+NN14f8WVRsGwnALrpnv171 uDo20Zd33cIPdhpqfTv+7DIkqs9J+jVLFpy50oGsFPGeLA8Y7ERJvGZlr62eG3I+3vCu lR+bZnyEmrxJjZEQk+fL2l7clRUBKbN691iL7YUWniMFpiudjeCjrQZV92Cz++yhlxVD YmBw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX3Pgbu5mwrHVPf5GIy0J4MXxCcTa7MP0zw7IjLfE5d+xMCNDag 2L+gPvg4K72JUf92tX3VY8gtLv/b0S1oc0e3nnJ6 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyV5mGcn+VK9iuH49J1PNgahIq2JcBpRWtie76m9ND3ahBj/ekfopfFB7TTYRgFvluRDJt4vcKVDpWBQABoLxWw X-Received: by 2002:a81:33d0:: with SMTP id z199mr18833953ywz.53.1580252665185; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 15:04:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 15:04:21 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20200124033436.81097-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> Message-Id: <20200128230421.49994-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20200124033436.81097-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.0.341.g760bfbb309-goog Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/15] add git-bugreport tool From: Jonathan Tan To: emilyshaffer@google.com Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, stolee@gmail.com, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de, gitster@pobox.com, martin.agren@gmail.com, aaron@schrab.com, Jonathan Tan Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org > From: Emily Shaffer > > This topic branch depends on the patch mailed in > lore.kernel.org/git/20191211233820.185153-1-emilyshaffer@google.com in order to > display scopes for configs gathered during "bugreport: add config values from > safelist". > > I'll summarize v4-v5. Since v4 has languished for some time, I don't > think an interdiff is too helpful, so I won't include one. Bonus, the > code is much simplified from some suggestions from Junio on how to > inspect objects, so I hope it's easy to review anyways. To everyone in the developer community interested in this set: what is the status of this? If this needs further review, then maybe it would be best if only patches 1-4 were put up for submission first, with a note in the bugreport documentation that more information may be added in future Git versions. For me, patches 1-4 look good and I don't have enough experience with uname (especially across libcs and OSes) to determine what should or should not be included - if this is typical of reviewers in the Git project, it might be better to submit patches 1-4 first, and then send each additional diagnostic separately, so that people who know what's going on in one area but not another can just comment on the area they know about. Having said that, I see that a few people have already looked at the entire patchset and made comments, so if they are OK with it, we don't need to split it up.