Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes:

>>> Yeah, I'm fine with a straight revert, too (I think it is fine to keep
>>> in master, though). I think jk/alloc-commit-id is built right on top of
>>> the original commit-slab topic, so it should be easy to do either way.
>>> Thanks for dealing with it.
>> Whatever we do, perhaps it is worth applying the test below on top?
> Yeah, thanks.  I think that is a good idea.  I was preparing a patch
> to tuck your minimum reproduction at the end of 4202, but your version
> and placement makes good sense.

OK, I pushed out updated 'maint' and 'master'.  The former merges
a rebased version of jk/alloc-commit-id in to make the "reorganize
the way we manage the in-core commit data" topic, and the latter
reverts the "Use SSE to micro-optimize a leaf function to check the
format of a ref string".

Please give them some quick sanity check.

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

Reply via email to