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=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,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 742031F55B for ; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 15:22:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726379AbgFLPWD (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2020 11:22:03 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35816 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726272AbgFLPWD (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2020 11:22:03 -0400 Received: from mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F22A7C03E96F for ; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 08:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com with SMTP id g129so5512705vsc.4 for ; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 08:22:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=1DR9vOK5XteYihvh31EHBJ2TrqHS/jaf9UnjW6rEthI=; b=urhOsiHYoXUo+4KgxcD/EHr9TcHHz+mwe6hqzUnCrs75cWGZjiEKR/vMpj732tusKl 81H9eSq2pnRvf50RvVFmmLUcrqOvOhrsn/axqi+vl0PJ1rPP3jf/MVDpTWTZXxWRYiP4 cagCire6Gr0DGDvg0qkMDnFcH9E/7uGWdwNWwxiMpDXFBHtXmKafc+u6NL+s6FjHZ34p aGbq2Z/TiUVzS6YbheWC37gKAsIe8W5NUvYsaU9nhcMmEmi08WBPo3QE5lRqJAk6Ys4r 8rv++JSJ9wW1ATKB86lvsx40yLKMVF4sKwGLDKI4b19FAz6Gc35x74KWcTEjGS7bqMza ezvQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=1DR9vOK5XteYihvh31EHBJ2TrqHS/jaf9UnjW6rEthI=; b=mTcMpRGPX7aQlqJYCeyNs7qrpD+MsDJHz8n0AOKGalX2qfwusEPCUwMqNehUbZp0AC i/KvCtEOYJjW2hzA1TyIYF0a2ov+AV/LYBM91q+GN7l1x06TyMAHAbxTPyWpHGzRbkv/ CDjSI/6GImPErvYOPHKbf0BRGQx/96uuhb+BinJ5vQ7EWI+e0lLF1ws1e1WlJSTAW+9j J+9S4ZDmx1qR25CYsSGdf1HI2NO9Oq5D7kQ+JBlPAgYGud6KnBKx3Fp4UpQao147rIop sdsDVOwe62tsol3no6QcXsGajixmsS5HIYro1FuHQt/PN3VsgIwAQRFJkkqhXZHm8oQb +ivw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530hEacqt7C9nS2dL5r4t5IdEFrXuZlsdV9hIUj8w3xWJVhlMIGJ 6rrGGZpjUck1rGXgmG0ATQtWwqAv X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzi+GLAhRywXJBxJwaJWgdfFlSCdSYQmoGKQ9bdNqI0+KSEB/BCcoNxYbadmBLd4Kq40poj7A== X-Received: by 2002:a67:542:: with SMTP id 63mr11627931vsf.128.1591975321289; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 08:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (25.173.196.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.196.173.25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l14sm1000892vkl.47.2020.06.12.08.22.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 12 Jun 2020 08:22:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Matt Rogers , "brian m. carlson" , Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , Git Mailing List , don@goodman-wilson.com, stolee@gmail.com, Jeff King Subject: Re: Re* [PATCH 8/9] fast-export: respect the possibly-overridden default branch name References: <1efe848f2b029e572cea61cadcfe36b9d3797836.1591823971.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> <20200610233912.GU6569@camp.crustytoothpaste.net> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 08:22:00 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Fri, 12 Jun 2020 08:19:49 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > As I said already, I personally do not think that this needs to be a > preparatory patch to anonymize 'master' that cannot be configured to > something else into 'ref0'. This will become necessary when we make > the primary branch configurable, so I think it is easier to replace > the counterpart to your [PATCH 8/9] in the original series with it > in the v2 series. Ah, I forgot to say, if you think it is easier to manage the main set of patches for the topic to eject as much preparatory changes as possible, I do not at all mind treating this as one of the preparatory step and queue it separately, making the main series depend on it. I just wanted to say that it is not necessary, even though it does not hurt. > Regarding the update to the comment before this "special case", I > would suggest to explain "why" not just "what". > > Thanks.