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=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL 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 B5BF11F953 for ; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 20:26:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229545AbhLTUZy (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Dec 2021 15:25:54 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55352 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229461AbhLTUZy (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Dec 2021 15:25:54 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x104a.google.com (mail-pj1-x104a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::104a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2D6BC061574 for ; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:25:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x104a.google.com with SMTP id j1-20020a17090a694100b001b1044f134aso7086871pjm.6 for ; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:25:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:subject:from:to :cc; bh=Dn7Zdh0a7bD7jiL7HY2XT+CdZAKtiwAnfHnFvhqiD6o=; b=FZDfsvg5qTKonSjwvAlYG/Lj+Ldw4dZ+6oLvrqLIemq6g0kbZDwp+Banu30B1lCr7B KGqisyQNu/sDYdK6XldiOkiUWZ+CX2krIF9KEDCquOpLvbCixEA5xUKZ8JNbxhVyWbdK DdBeyIfw+qfoNII3wZBfNL6QoGMk9NUmXZxDa+wBPLTTzd7AuNhifA3uGiIs2/XzKwqq MNiA1rvfkuq+WTbnebxZWOTPUJo5zfTTA2mO44dWJD98uXzzdwGKgGufsxmWBHq2T16H Ztpm2gPpXRRvFBTkZVkIt/zBeuVxSst2RHZxeWb6Ag9yoKnyU7ovtIxCZpwK221dOVoV 8s7Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:from:to:cc; bh=Dn7Zdh0a7bD7jiL7HY2XT+CdZAKtiwAnfHnFvhqiD6o=; b=1aLpQEiSyh4pl2dMk3iL1+X2JPa66CcGv5l+N2j3xVJa50KddcSWx9qcBQmCfv203T 04cB9HJfgIy0MHcOeW3OMgnBk+5R5/ceiM/ETUOWEHFp0GgSTGaPfRLmQDqgZGem8XwV JwiNASqjKKirEIGaOgjtlED6pOgSsdCqkiky3rk1Vw8nYjXxw3Nk9olt9SPBeoGvF1oK TtaGhzpTgriSH74Xk3glC79UaY214sK8dL0WY7r1Nw3gPkwYAMapkMA87MEtPhE53EPR r9d69N8HJrqYfNIz/yMNSX/tj27nzpehLEIv0uHm+IkJDXHv3vO0mhY+Lq01JxAMWlBK HO8Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530xVPCGngt74sfkxjwqhgQNChOfgqWBvf6Q0jzDZvZdGsgS4xYU Oceh0u+rW71k7oFC9rjNUHQRGVDMqZdsNQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwNKmoDBZUV9b+QQIpNry+9RfoM8CLOxAJ0UKamiwwwRgUMIVYSiYhEUM+CaqXmUaYIqxKMFfzkAREXzQ== X-Received: from chooglen.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:24:72f4:c0a8:26d9]) (user=chooglen job=sendgmr) by 2002:a17:902:ecc1:b0:148:a2e8:2761 with SMTP id a1-20020a170902ecc100b00148a2e82761mr18518959plh.104.1640031953359; Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:25:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:25:44 -0800 In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20211216003213.99135-1-chooglen@google.com> <20211216233324.65126-1-chooglen@google.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] implement branch --recurse-submodules From: Glen Choo To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Tan , Josh Steadmon , Emily Shaffer , "=?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason" , Philippe Blain Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Glen Choo writes: > >> What happened was that I got confused by [1], where it reads: >> >> [...] >> find the tip of js/branch-track-inherit from 'seen' [*] >> [...] >> >> [Footnote] >> >> * One way to do so would be: >> >> $ git fetch >> $ git show 'remote/origin/seen^{/^Merge branch .js/branch-track-inherit.}' >> >> The commit that I got was the "merge of js/branch-track-inherit into >> 'seen'", but what you intended was the "merge of js/branch-track-inherit >> into gc/branch-recurse-submodules"; I didn't realize that there might >> have been more than commit matching that regex. > > Yeah, that was not quite clearly written. The way it was showing > was to find the tip of the other branch. The instruction was to > prepare you (and others reading from the sidelines) for a case where > your branch depends on somebody else's work that is *not* even in > 'seen' (e.g. I may have an older version of 'seen' but there is a > newer and clearly improved version on the list that is likely to > replace). In such a case, you'd > > (1) "find" the tip of the other branch, either by traversing from > the tip of 'seen' to find the merge and taking its second > parent, or applying the latest from the list to a locally > created topic branch forked off of 'main', > > (2) create your topic branch, forked off of 'main', and merge (1) > into it, and > > (3) build your series on it. > > If I have your previous round, and if the other topic you depend on > hasn't changed, you can omit (2) and instead find the equivalent of > (2) I created for your topic the last time I queued it. > >> I made some commit message changes. Unless you think it's a good idea, I >> won't re-roll this to fix the issue. > > Let's not waste your message changes to clarify the patches. > >> So if my branch were not in 'seen', I should have based my changes on >> 'origin/js/branch-track-inherit'. If my branch is in 'seen', I should >> base it off the merge of js/branch-track-inherit' into my my branch? > > Hopefully the above is clear now? Sorry for the trouble. > > Thanks. It's no trouble for me. I should be thanking you for taking the time to make it clear :) I really appreciate it.