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-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 2F76E1F55B for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 16:42:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728539AbgEUQmI (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2020 12:42:08 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:51343 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728464AbgEUQmI (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2020 12:42:08 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7E04DB1DD; Thu, 21 May 2020 12:42:06 -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=BQgq/cKVxDC/+4stqUujLGPQ8kI=; b=cpKxq2 TEer7gc1rottBz71e2qJTOozqu5pnKT79+cdB7QOcXtgyitVMcCY6fOUTtbpKgCI za2BX4D+QyDidmPfICT0lxBRiZ5IQAL4uYChY5+uah+GSA+jvtW1z/NcIjhTAwST JYZds6f91fahLfvGCoFwsUebkWMS2kfdVoOyA= 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=o2SBJt23Yp+fAUBeJfQxg04wC2cIp6WP zYy05pPLczxA2K2jOJQoxsDfDc0CBuH0yXbsXgxljIl622W0bEOJtD999eHlT/1U UN+aSP+/XL7/Gchtld8g/1MVE3+wiYVpiu3nUR+dd038mTOz26Au6queFB5+JQd/ rPU9qDYMdgE= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDAF4DB1DC; Thu, 21 May 2020 12:42:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (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 0F9E1DB1DB; Thu, 21 May 2020 12:42:03 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Jonathan Nieder , Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org, Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: Protocol v2 in v2.27 (Re: Re* [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.27.0-rc1) References: <20200520193156.GA4700@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20200520220023.GB3648@google.com> <20200521021533.GC3648@google.com> <1a3bf366-d888-74d3-5f81-78dfeb5eb79c@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 09:42:02 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1a3bf366-d888-74d3-5f81-78dfeb5eb79c@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee's message of "Thu, 21 May 2020 07:54:08 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 004553E4-9B82-11EA-A884-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Derrick Stolee writes: >> Git 2.26 used protocol v2 as its default protocol, but soon after >> release, users noticed that the protocol v2 negotiation code was prone >> to fail when fetching from some remotes that are far ahead of others >> (such as linux-next.git versus Linus's linux.git). That has been >> fixed by 0b07eecf6ed (Merge branch 'jt/v2-fetch-nego-fix', >> 2020-05-01), > > Should we really mention the merge here? Is it because the "fix" is > spread across two commits? Why not say the tip of the topic? Strictly speaking, the tip of the topic is sufficient. You can use a third-party script "git when-merged" to ask "which exact merge gave us this commit in the mainline?" when given only the tip of the topic, which is what I often end up doing. Writing the merge result reduces the need for doing the same "reverse" look-up. On the other hand, going the other way to find the then-current tip of the topic from the result of the merge is much easier; you can ask the merge result what its second parent is. The rest of your review I can entirely agree with. Thanks, always, for a prompt and well written review.