| Message ID | pull.1164.git.git.1640287790.gitgitgadget@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | preliminary fixes for reftable support | expand |
"Han-Wen Nienhuys via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes: > these two commits to the reftable library prepare for making 2 tests in the > test suite pass in my pending changes for reftable support. Welcome again to our "we cannot count to three" club. > This series was built against 'master'. It also has a fix for a fd leak (>= > 0 vs > 0), which is part of my reftable-coverity fixes topic. What is going on here? We have the same fix in two series? Are these two series meant to be applied, or is this a beginning of splitting and resubmitting the other larger series into smaller chunks? I am not opposed to having two identical fixes to a high priority problem, one in a long series that may take longer to graduate and the other one in a short series that is trivial to verify. I am not opposed to retract a longer series and trickle a number of series' that replace it, either. I just wanted to know what is happening here. Thanks. > Han-Wen Nienhuys (3): > reftable: fix typo in header > reftable: signal overflow > reftable: support preset file mode for writing > > reftable/block.h | 2 +- > reftable/error.c | 2 ++ > reftable/readwrite_test.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > reftable/reftable-error.h | 4 ++++ > reftable/reftable-writer.h | 3 +++ > reftable/stack.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > reftable/stack_test.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > reftable/writer.c | 3 +++ > 8 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > base-commit: fae76fe5da3df25d752f2251b7ccda3f62813aa9 > Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-git-1164%2Fhanwen%2Freftable-features-v1 > Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-git-1164/hanwen/reftable-features-v1 > Pull-Request: https://github.com/git/git/pull/1164
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > What is going on here? We have the same fix in two series? Are > these two series meant to be applied, or is this a beginning of > splitting and resubmitting the other larger series into smaller > chunks? > > I am not opposed to having two identical fixes to a high priority > problem, one in a long series that may take longer to graduate and > the other one in a short series that is trivial to verify. I am not > opposed to retract a longer series and trickle a number of series' > that replace it, either. I just wanted to know what is happening > here. I guess the answer is neither. An unrelated change in this topic needed to touch a line that is close to a line that was changed in the other topic, and you made the same change as the latter in the same hunk---which in this case helps with the merge of these two topics into the integration branches. Thanks.