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 3164CC433EF for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 09:35:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233236AbiAMJfr (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jan 2022 04:35:47 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53066 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231216AbiAMJfp (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jan 2022 04:35:45 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-x531.google.com (mail-ed1-x531.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::531]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A876BC06173F for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 01:35:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ed1-x531.google.com with SMTP id 30so20905250edv.3 for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 01:35:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QFC2E/peMoFOzQhjxgjiQYjG5ld/etSWe2QjqIOej6U=; b=h+RtUjTL/RQkUeiTAXkMGk/h5mvS+7P6bZA2k2q7Wq3Xh3ztm4+SUhOxOtFZXBUWFS JjppT4IDcyC5SFyLvb7SKFNyDXLWFDo1yxq4e2tfC/MaN5A9/84TGLrj2gtmh8UXzHOe 3TTCu3viA3lR4CgHn8ookpvrEAuysnytdg5DAQJpTvVf1jrakZgTDo6zA4SrUcTCl0Sb iMWIpA5kLX6vREIoKOgTZ4cj8ptephiLcwl531HYpz4LEsHKY3BGvQmEh5hap+qyfhdT Np0GxTCTCFWHzMqwLpkk9iwENKugKTSTnWXcIxge/Vcj8ke4Jdl1MmXX71lIDm4/Tm7x touQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QFC2E/peMoFOzQhjxgjiQYjG5ld/etSWe2QjqIOej6U=; b=ChtO9x1SXGkSibfKwetEMiVvlA+R56KTqGT+qDXEsj8lkLckkbsJk+6IMDPE+J/3FJ OO7v80NE/7oc0V37/t+FzfYwGuHAASVyPf3xx05qRXH/t8ZoCfaVK9YoBfT1gadfpqkr GpKcuUgMSBdvm/U5yLHLCP24/5htezbq/IjSWq/G7AHESx/sJBEa58RiBa4xKjk+zFpC Z2q1ltrDzRh1B6NVdaOf4w7/9KAOd3LWa3DU5bFQkdnE6j0iNTiIR6ByLgkJ/myWgm6j 5dkHEHIAziUoaZC6EENSp7q7wjpXni1cBMoUMy0Mnnfy1aYFqjARmj1MTz1Ld+5qRadQ sg9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532xY7l79cTkivMHJj/xn45uibnVDRyjnUk0iOiq2+pKd6aKFib5 ZLyRo7P2vj2KcpF6ban9tiLUgDYd9zve9A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw3jenwC2aNjRmBYwvs4zLU3gc8LaKd4vfND0TDwrzCA9zGEtOJZxXK7ggAWzm5P+mj2d5F4A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1e93:: with SMTP id f19mr3328866edf.199.1642066543162; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 01:35:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from gmgdl (j120189.upc-j.chello.nl. [24.132.120.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o25sm902997edr.20.2022.01.13.01.35.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 13 Jan 2022 01:35:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from avar by gmgdl with local (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1n7wWE-000qBF-78; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 10:35:42 +0100 From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Elijah Newren Cc: Junio C Hamano , Johannes Schindelin , Christian Couder , Git Mailing List , Christian Couder , Taylor Blau Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce new merge-tree-ort command Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2022 10:26:57 +0100 References: <20220105163324.73369-1-chriscool@tuxfamily.org> <220111.86mtk2xb1y.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid; Emacs 27.1; mu4e 1.6.10 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <220113.86k0f4vuz5.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 12 2022, Elijah Newren wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 10:06 AM Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> Elijah Newren writes: >> > ... >> I however suspect that =C3=86var didn't mean by "legacy merge plumbing >> built-in" the strategy backends. IOW, I had an impression that what >> is on the chopping block is merge-tree and not merge-recursive. >> >> But since you brought up deprecation of recursive, let's spend a few >> minutes on the topic. > > Not sure it matters, but for reference, =C3=86var explicitly brought up > merge-recursive.c. The fuller quote was: > >> >> I.e. is it really costing us >> >> to just leave these "legacy merge" plumbing built-ins and >> >> merge-recursive.c etc. in place? > > Because he brought it up, I decided to address it. It was unclear to > me whether he meant builtin/merge-recursive.c or the toplevel > merge-recursive.c, so I just addressed both. FWIW what I meant (but clearly didn't make clear enough) is whether we'd deprecate the git-merge-tree(1) command, not whatever powers it under the hood. I.e. I took the greater discussion here to mean (but may have misunderstood it) that we were talking about the needs for a libgit2-replacing merge plumbing. The existing git-merge-tree command probably gets us 5% towards that, and I can see how being bug-for-bug compatible with it might be inconvenient in some future on-top-of-ort rewrite and extension of it. So we probably SHOULD keep it, but I don't think it's a MUST. I.e. if you/someone wrote some more powerful version of it, and keeping it became hard to support I think it would be OK to transition/deprecate it, as presumably its existing users wouldn't be too inconvenienced, or would be happier with the more powerful plumbing tool.