Ramsay Jones <ram...@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> writes:
> On 14/07/14 18:51, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Ramsay Jones <ram...@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>> that the merge commit 7608c87e fails. Looking at the details of the
>>> merge resolution, made me think of Duy's split index work.
>> Yes, there is a deliberately dropped hunk from dt/cache-tree-repair
>> in that merge, because the topic relied on being able to say "here
>> is the file descriptor, write the index to it", which no longer is
>> available with the split-index topic.
> Ah, OK. Sounds like everything is under control then.
Wasn't, but now I think it is ;-)
David, could you please double check the conflict resolution at
882426ea (Merge branch 'dt/cache-tree-repair' into jch, 2014-07-14),
at about the middle between master..pu? By eyeballing
git diff 882426ea^ 882426ea
we should see what your series would have done if it were based on
top of the nd/split-index topic. The most iffy is the first hunk of
change to builtin/commit.c, which is more or less my rewrite of what
you did on top of 'master'.
The change to builtin/checkout.c also seems somewhat iffy in that we
treat the_index.cache_tree (aka "active_cache_tree") as if cache
trees are something we can manipulate independent of a particular
index_state (which has been the rule for a long time), even though
in the world order after nd/split-index topic, cache_tree_update()
can no longer be used on a cache-tree that is not associated to a
particular index_state. It is not a problem with your series, but
comes from nd/split-index topic, and it might indicate a slight
unevenness of the API (i.e. we may want to either insist that the
public API to muck with a cache-tree outside cache-tree.c must be
accessed via an index-state and never via a bare cache-tree
structure, by insisting that cache_tree_fully_valid() to take a
pointer to an index-state as well; or we may want to go the other
way and allow API users to pass a bare cache-tree without the
index-state when the latter is not absolutely necessary, by changing
cache_tree_update() to take a cache-tree, not an index-state).
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html