From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Beller Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 0/8] Expose submodule parallelism to the user Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 09:48:17 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1452541321-27810-1-git-send-email-sbeller@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "git@vger.kernel.org" , Jonathan Nieder , Jens Lehmann To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jan 13 18:48:23 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aJPWw-0004Co-MI for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 18:48:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932274AbcAMRsT (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jan 2016 12:48:19 -0500 Received: from mail-ig0-f175.google.com ([209.85.213.175]:36584 "EHLO mail-ig0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932182AbcAMRsS (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jan 2016 12:48:18 -0500 Received: by mail-ig0-f175.google.com with SMTP id z14so156682613igp.1 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 09:48:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=jhOudn8hbn1Vg4F1tFVx473EqA59uVn8UqfbCCm8e+Y=; b=EJi47Ju48hbReHohgX0zl5y8RFFKgglVCk9HmYUg0lu6GM8A8LL7cXiuidvUHqf2cz w9AB3nnlXQ5SpUNro3SvG0KwWGIkhk5wtBdeOPu8mOc57S4h1l26BogprU+wwsv/oeZC u6FOCUc/i8cBtzxmmz8SJXKZyEn44TwmtxbiiQ+Q1nqMLT8W23hjA+2Psxbt5PUqar2U JI2VhDneZ2hnemvCri9p/tNU1zmgsRsKGQbYjuL+ZpOFoBeHQOMcTYo6CoFGtj/+dANA Bd0Zjg99JnXaEhyDDP6BH/nw9/4S4Oac74b451EwWQ4XoPrZJQSmWzwJNCckb3eUi77I xkwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=jhOudn8hbn1Vg4F1tFVx473EqA59uVn8UqfbCCm8e+Y=; b=XJhAZXE+zVusHu/3Vj/80Eq/Ba8x5+VUPxkyNEmD9KAQz8NVY7E8XQ893bHqS0Ce6x wPziTcwAjwucN92AHKIFGYKc/s6eos9CX4+tGaX6o7KvTrwz87e0OaONUkltAoyl1KgF LZptureU7SIBotjMFqH4OBBn7jQDZ+GSMD5qOy5LlhAJrQrhfW5Lh8mcPt4COmby+rnA 8lq7imvZPmPBbaB1SfqXWuAd30ycJRZ6Fgrola2RJwiCJrWAP5/hnoM7r9/yjwIw1hxo lcVX6wp8LM+vZ63RxwH3hiQ5e41tmoQ1QoNamsKmpVEmEpZ/azhGWDFsWNjusXJ/fNUm 4o1g== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkVlmTZzr+cOG+IneBkDJXgMP+U7ImKr/ETBrJeMmJOZ3BThz2fPfeYq4Sf1mY0DYhINq4Vt3tA13SVolfmmY5Mg0U0CHijD5hTVcreL7Xrqf2a2/U= X-Received: by 10.50.77.81 with SMTP id q17mr89670igw.93.1452707297519; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 09:48:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.107.8.74 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 09:48:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Stefan Beller writes: > >> Additionally to that I needed to switch the order of arguments for the >> parallel processing calls, too, to make it compile again. > > That sounds as if the previous one that was queued did not compile, > but I didn't recall seeing such breakage. Also comparison between > corresponding patches did not show such a change, either. > > But perhaps ... > >> I assume I just did that work twice as the previous version >> ought to compile, too. > > ... means that you didn't need such a switch after all, and the > re-sent series didn't have it. My local state has had the switch, and I needed to make it before sending out the latest version. I do not recall doing that to the previous version, but that version is fine, too. Which means I may have missed some review comment (if any) or that I am forgetting things (I was on holidays for 3 weeks, barely touching an electronic device). > > I am just making sure that I got the right version in my tree, so > please don't behave as if I am accusing you that you advertised that > you did more work than you actually did and go defensive ;-) It should not sound as if I go defensive by being accused. I just want to point out I may have missed a thing on my end, so double caution for reviewers may be warranted. It was badly worded though. > If the > reason I didn't see one kind of change in the series I received is > because it didn't have to be done and the description mistakenly > said that such a change is included, that is perfectly fine. > > Thanks. Thanks, Stefan