From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Cc: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
"Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
"Christian Couder" <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
"Git Mailing List" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
"Christian Couder" <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>,
"Taylor Blau" <me@ttaylorr.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce new merge-tree-ort command
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2022 10:06:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqk0f4x20a.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABPp-BFei07srZBgyKs6HCm+G+hmPR-3_EkKjRK8WwGL1Uf2oA@mail.gmail.com> (Elijah Newren's message of "Tue, 11 Jan 2022 14:25:56 -0800")
Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>> And isn't any doubt around that even more reason to just go with
>> Elijah's plan of introducing new plumbing? I.e. is it really costing us
>> to just leave these "legacy merge" plumbing built-ins
>
> I definitely think it's worth guiding users away from the old `git
> merge-tree` behavior in documentation (i.e. deprecating it). That may
> also lead towards its eventual removal, but I'm not as worried about
> that.
Yup, promising users that we will remove it and telling them that
they should migrate away from it is necessary. Doing anything else
is simply irresponsible.
I however suspect that Ævar didn't mean by "legacy merge plumbing
built-in" the strategy backends. IOW, I had an impression that what
is on the chopping block is merge-tree and not merge-recursive.
But since you brought up deprecation of recursive, let's spend a few
minutes on the topic.
> `git merge-recursive` was actively used in various places, including
> in `git cherry-pick`. I had used it a few times myself in a script.
> I don't see a need to deprecate it currently, which naturally would
> push its removal (if anyone is pushing for it) even further away.
I suspect that we may be able to just invoke ort when recursive is
invoked, and such a wrapping may even be easier than wrapping "git
blame" to replace "git annotate" (where a command line option or two
needs to change behaviour). I doubt there is -X<strategy-option>
that affects recursive that ORT does not understand, so it may be
quite simple to deprecate "merge -s recursive".
As you say, replacing the internal implementation is a different
matter.
> * `merge-recursive.c` is still hard-coded in three places in the
> code; you can't even set a configuration option to choose merge-ort.c
> in those places: builtin/am, builtin/merge-recursive, and
> builtin/stash.
>
> More details on that second point: All three of these use
> merge_recursive_generic() and need that usage to be replaced. It's on
> my TODO list.
Yes, I do recall mentioning that when we were reviewing the series
that added ort.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-12 18:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-05 16:33 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce new merge-tree-ort command Christian Couder
2022-01-05 16:33 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] merge-ort: add " Christian Couder
2022-01-05 17:08 ` Elijah Newren
2022-01-05 16:33 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] merge-ort: add t/t4310-merge-tree-ort.sh Christian Couder
2022-01-05 17:29 ` Elijah Newren
2022-01-05 16:53 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce new merge-tree-ort command Elijah Newren
2022-01-05 17:32 ` Elijah Newren
2022-01-07 17:58 ` Christian Couder
2022-01-07 19:06 ` Elijah Newren
2022-01-10 13:49 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-01-10 17:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-01-11 13:47 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-01-11 17:00 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-11 22:25 ` Elijah Newren
2022-01-12 18:06 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2022-01-12 20:06 ` Elijah Newren
2022-01-13 6:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-01-13 8:01 ` Elijah Newren
2022-01-13 9:26 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-12 17:54 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-01-13 9:22 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-10 17:59 ` Elijah Newren
2022-01-11 21:15 ` Elijah Newren
2022-02-22 13:08 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-01-11 22:30 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-01-12 0:41 ` Elijah Newren
2022-02-22 12:44 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-01-07 19:54 ` Johannes Schindelin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqk0f4x20a.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=chriscool@tuxfamily.org \
--cc=christian.couder@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).