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=-4.1 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,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE 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 D5D4B1F462 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 18:12:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726007AbfGYSMM (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:12:12 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:59273 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725800AbfGYSMM (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:12:12 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3133D892D7; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:12:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) 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; s=sasl; bh=XhSkeBAAvMziKqU/J5dzuzd4Ev0=; b=rB1G9T 7XP/hqzZ+WDyY0Ftl+t9xJufc2eqchso8wL3+JuNZIzEsmYyZdSQt0opTKUf7+MJ J2Ot9zJlFRa0ijXd8BHs9QBP6fbE5nNnYyccgDhJPjW92tWDw8RIcyNU7B6JPelU 8po1UoJgPMfZL3jOe1gCMN2XKfIksEmmn0X5A= 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; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ACGwiL0i+ZTJyeY95QmTsetfzOPcizpX AWYQpBVmM7VeZecB92zxlhteaa0SIdy0beE78S0rnjzgvDnOnoUaqI+kFkWODWFL zjo4Xk1pAtuM+jmibXvb1rRqcMudBsoBZC5s2JGn3pTRZttEpvyqeox76Odp4H6T r7cFhWgTjGk= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25882892D6; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:12:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 533F9892D2; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:12:09 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Elijah Newren Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/19] Cleanup merge API References: <20190725174611.14802-1-newren@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 11:12:07 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20190725174611.14802-1-newren@gmail.com> (Elijah Newren's message of "Thu, 25 Jul 2019 10:45:52 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B7B9ED5E-AF07-11E9-89A5-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Elijah Newren writes: > Before writing a replacement merge strategy for recursive, I decided > to first cleanup the merge API -- streamlining merge-recursive.h and > making it more readable. It includes some fixes I noticed along the > way, and the last two patches were some forgotten changes of mine I > rediscovered that had minor textual conflicts before I rebased them on > this series. > > While there are minor textual and semantic dependencies between > these patches (preventing me from splitting up this series), they > are logically separate and can be reviewed independently. Nice. > Stuff I'd most welcome review on: > * Is cache-tree.c the right place for write_tree_from_memory()? > [see patch 7] Should there be docs on how it differs from > write_index_as_tree(), already found in cache-tree? What does > the latter even do? write_index_as_tree() is supposed to write the contents of an index state as a tree object, and return the object ID for the resulting tree. It is the primary interface designed to be used by write-tree. > Stuff I didn't address: > * All current callers (3 of them?) of merge_recursive() always pass > ... I'm guessing the first did in an attempt to > exactly match the git-merge-recursive.py scripts' behavior. That matches my recollection.