From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 973CBC433FE for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 19:56:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232419AbiKGT4S (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Nov 2022 14:56:18 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40456 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231519AbiKGT4Q (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Nov 2022 14:56:16 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-xd30.google.com (mail-io1-xd30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d30]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9423E20BEC for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 11:56:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd30.google.com with SMTP id s10so7938044ioa.5 for ; Mon, 07 Nov 2022 11:56:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ZUUrefOqP72yLUOi0nzFnSlZ6F6Q9wm8MhjQRizihaA=; b=vXXu8QEaXLIky6gC/TRh9Jbxj5PoxW28YULmykldNA2A7udRr45bYYCUK+l5KgWaWd TcPKKMc9fZAt0cLWeJWU6NNP3Mnze7wOkO2wRUxhC8bMPHbdB9r6tphDq1gcGrg7uICK j5EvqrxCc1R9rxjyWq9MbHzr1+IuwMMc8IfUMM6zfFTRH+1knxTNou6Zf1VjcYt3/JSV G3W/otne0EqxYEIurOpCM8PLBa5VWhx6JRAiIH54OT83zG46/VjAMz0L4rHyXGHiFCFB witaUJhlsbwu+0bnph+raF0PgVSnJDgnLfNfxSl9QEzYfgrduK0Ux/I1NG5jqvIJ4uOl ZjBw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ZUUrefOqP72yLUOi0nzFnSlZ6F6Q9wm8MhjQRizihaA=; b=L0YU/AZjvvMst2ivxDRoCzHx7IOukliLtuc9wsA8XInp/6Hw6KAPCMWdqYAaWwcFxb 6/1Ia/uLVGhQ4focdfeqwVjnA2eWYSaU5vAwxDm1SVmGYnNKcSaXnTWM+Qr6W/VE8+Ox CtYITPW1f4+xn1JKcdcDBxYSEAnat4wwNuTcVnNWP/hBcnLjX/W5IXmXp+eKgdvkRKT0 UP8SqZE6th8hDqGwnyJY0X/FvhfXm0ckrP3KdZTwySIKXfJzmKB2MtXhVageHM4RKNXA tUy+fsqoKi5CBkT9/xaodOtU8ZQ8l6hx4LlRMpSMV5q0LvpzIr4k+oQ+wDroKf7HP9ze ZLnA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1yA1plNt6iXyeSOnQsuup7DdzthEaPYWc7qXBOAqHlkuw4eKod XtSKW3dO+64f89iIaHlD69aUJQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6E93tI6HGsPtQoMvau5B7cx2dBCqaHu3e3GVHzszVBOwfOHczhAmHDT9dQL2yx4idlXTOhew== X-Received: by 2002:a02:240c:0:b0:375:686d:7e63 with SMTP id f12-20020a02240c000000b00375686d7e63mr22951688jaa.205.1667850974953; Mon, 07 Nov 2022 11:56:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g26-20020a05663810fa00b00374f84d3f4dsm3105979jae.120.2022.11.07.11.56.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 07 Nov 2022 11:56:14 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2022 14:56:13 -0500 From: Taylor Blau To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: Taylor Blau , Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget , y@nand.local, git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Phillip Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] rebase: stop setting GIT_REFLOG_ACTION Message-ID: References: <221107.86mt92vjul.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <221107.86mt92vjul.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 04:51:38PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 04 2022, Taylor Blau wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 03:19:00PM +0000, Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget wrote: > >> This is a follow up to pw/rebase-reflog-fixes that moves away from using > >> GIT_REFLOG_ACTION internally. This conflicts with patches 12 & 14 in [1]. As > >> this series replaces the code being changed in those patches I think the > >> best solution would be to just drop them. > > > > Thanks, I appreciate the updated round. > > > > The conflict you noted in [1] is a perfect example of why I dislike > > queuing sweeping leak cleanups like in that series. Those two patches > > need to get dropped in order to queue this series. OK, except what > > happens if a different part of [1] marks a test as leak-free when that > > is no longer the case because of something in this series? > > I'm about to rebase my v2 on this topic, which I think is the best way > forward, so this is about to become a moot point. > > But I think this is a good example of why it's better to solve the merge > conflict rather than dropping patches from one topic: > > In this case the merge conflict is trivial to solve: Keep the side of > this topic over mine, and after remove the one function call the > compiler was alerting about. I agree that it is better to solve the merge conflict. But doing so is time consuming, especially in a series which is unfamiliar to me. I appreciate you sending a debased version. Thanks, Taylor