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=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI 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 13D9F1F97E for ; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 01:00:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726713AbeKYLue (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Nov 2018 06:50:34 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:64425 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726400AbeKYLue (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Nov 2018 06:50:34 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7399412C9D3; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 20:00:46 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=Qr+wZNx5IWx2 Se+B2+9ulKPILJk=; b=xxvz0nSyjjLcfTuTh0VG7+uYtN4sgVLPZrxhORNQOgva 8VHT//ik8Vq//KLGmDRxsLIyqxSDaJV3rrEAsQ+X25owxzaZzkToJ1USB/A2Qb5Y maMtlHtMIzVt7ypkIjHvZTiMaxUSBZt+DMGN0AxGfocjdYggLSFWU47A7oSMvOs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=DTKhKZ SfFHVaDkCJaxzqXHHniMnFcIyVyp6KeBI9QlhKelcH+gJ7UY/gbhrmoOUd8MwWqP wvx8Wv4a03lm2dW3+KFM3UbLrYHqU+dReTdnEhRBirn14+EwkxF6asjQe+whmCO6 WYx45n4BFyA6BdZetNMDCppKJEsMqzHcvSNfE= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BEF212C9D2; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 20:00:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.187.50.168]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D937012C9D1; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 20:00:44 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.20.0-rc1 References: <87y39w1wc2.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <877eh219ih.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 10:00:43 +0900 In-Reply-To: <877eh219ih.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFyIEFy?= =?utf-8?B?bmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Sat, 24 Nov 2018 21:54:46 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 89BFFFF2-F04D-11E8-BB36-BFB3E64BB12D-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason writes: >> * "git rebase" and "git rebase -i" have been reimplemented in C. > > Here's another regression in the C version (and rc1),... > I wasn't trying to stress test rebase. I was just wanting to rebase a > history I was about to force-push after cleaning it up, hardly an > obscure use-case. So [repeat last transmission in > https://public-inbox.org/git/87y39w1wc2.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com/ ] which, to those who are reading from sidelines: Given that we're still finding regressions bugs in the rebase-in-C version should we be considering reverting 5541bd5b8f ("rebase: defau= lt to using the builtin rebase", 2018-08-08)? I love the feature, but fear that the current list of known regressio= ns serve as a canary for a larger list which we'd discover if we held of= f for another major release (and would re-enable rebase.useBuiltin=3Dtr= ue in master right after 2.20 is out the door). I am fine with the proposed flip, but I'll have to see the extent of damage this late in the game so that I won't miss anything. In addition to the one-liner below, we'd need to update the quoted release notes entry, and possibly adjust some tests (even though the "reimplementation" ought to be bug-to-bug compatible, it may not be). diff --git b/builtin/rebase.c a/builtin/rebase.c index 9dc8475cd3..60e357c735 100644 --- b/builtin/rebase.c +++ a/builtin/rebase.c @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ static int use_builtin_rebase(void) cp.git_cmd =3D 1; if (capture_command(&cp, &out, 6)) { strbuf_release(&out); - return 1; + return 0; } =20 strbuf_trim(&out);