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: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04D6A1F953 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 15:27:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236407AbhKOPai (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:30:38 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:59080 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235326AbhKOPae (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:30:34 -0500 Received: (qmail 13236 invoked by uid 109); 15 Nov 2021 15:27:37 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 15:27:37 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 11746 invoked by uid 111); 15 Nov 2021 15:27:37 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:27:37 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:27:36 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.34.0-rc2 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 04:06:45PM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > Sorry, but I'm currently completely loaded with work and thus didn't > find the capacity to have a deeper look yet and will probably not find > the time for a few more days. So the earliest I can have a look at this > is probably beginning next week. > > With that in mind, I'm happy to have this change reverted for now, as it > is... Thanks for chiming in (and again, sorry for bringing this up so late in the cycle). > > > We probably should revert this step as it can affect correctness in > > > a big way, but I wonder if the other steps in the same series, or > > > other topic that came later, rely on it. > > > > I looked them over, and I think this is pretty independent (with the > > exception of the refactoring of the no_walk/unsorted flags, but > > obviously that had to come first). > > .. completely independent of the other patches in this series and can be > reverted on its own. Only question is whether we also want to revert the > patch introducing this option in the first place given that it would end > up without a user afterwards. It looks like Junio queued a revert of the whole patch in a7df4f52af (Revert "connected: do not sort input revisions", 2021-11-11), which is on "master". So I think we should have a clean slate to look at this in the next cycle. -Peff