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 589011F87F for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 03:39:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731959AbeKNNlM (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Nov 2018 08:41:12 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:54258 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727065AbeKNNlM (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Nov 2018 08:41:12 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F0FC117359; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 22:39:50 -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=wms9VgjUH+q/ QVrP01gS0Ah5nKA=; b=uxFdwZwDNGjHZ2sACqWsm/rDrdCQF7xlsFSjAdNpbFAX bPKmhEmO6p8NyhOEHRNtPknTL2sFH6Twnk5C1IT4ZVTvFFbqK1Gocl+BzTGwReCN 7uWdT8J8pcQsmZvujDk7o3JhoAqP4rZlLco9pC/LY0egpdn1xH3Xux7ZAL2J03M= 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=o13nJw sOkbPeskD0xxbkQQmHJ5Ql0VymZb4OksvDHZKVKnzkJONXAojk+ozcSNtO7ea+qD QQZ6fcmxNKtDNCx8zCBCnI+TAR4Fq5xOyGGyEfRRV/XXcnVkwlY65vo5FIE6yNXZ Q1lrSDqu6QmsdahZS0NrMcqAmLL+erHruh0fc= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 253DE117357; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 22:39:50 -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 99E52117355; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 22:39:49 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk, Johannes Schindelin , Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Pratik Karki , Jeff King , Stefan Beller Subject: Re: rebase-in-C stability for 2.20 References: <00d9b0e4-dde5-c96d-76d7-42fb9ac393f8@talktalk.net> <1b8461d1-6cb7-6622-94d2-44c27623236d@talktalk.net> <87y39w1wc2.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 12:39:48 +0900 In-Reply-To: <87y39w1wc2.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFyIEFy?= =?utf-8?B?bmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Tue, 13 Nov 2018 22:50:05 +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: F05081CA-E7BE-11E8-BD1C-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: > According to Junio's calendar we're now 2 days from 2.20-rc0. We have > the js/rebase-autostash-detach-fix bug I reported sitting in "pu" still= , > and then this. > > I see we still have rebase.useBuiltin in the code as an escape hatch, > but it's undocumented. > > Given that we're still finding regressions bugs in the rebase-in-C > version should we be considering reverting 5541bd5b8f ("rebase: default > to using the builtin rebase", 2018-08-08)? > > I love the feature, but fear that the current list of known regressions > serve as a canary for a larger list which we'd discover if we held off > for another major release (and would re-enable rebase.useBuiltin=3Dtrue= in > master right after 2.20 is out the door). > > But maybe I'm being overly paranoid. What do those more familiar with > this think? I was hoping that having it early in GfW 2.19 would have smoked out all the remaining issues, but it seems that those building from the source and testing have usage patterns different enough to find more issues. This is a normal part of the development process, and hopefully the remaining bugs are minor and can be flushed out in the -rc testing period---this kind of thing is the whole reason why we code-freeze and test rcs. It unfortunately is too late to depend on the rebase.useBuiltin as an escape hatch, as 'master', 'next', or anywhere else had the "rebase and rebase -i in C" series merged without it set to false and used in any seriousness. Quite honestly, I think we can trust the rest of the "rebase and rebase -i in C" series much more than its "use the scripted one even though we have built-in one" part. So if we have to seriously consider holding back, we may be better off ripping the whole thing out. I do not offhand know how involved such a reversion would be, though, and I am *NOT* looking forward to having do such a major surgery right before the release.