From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6FD81F858 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 21:18:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751480AbcG1VSf (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2016 17:18:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:58924 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751375AbcG1VSd (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2016 17:18:33 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 906922FF49; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 17:18:32 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=hEKxpvXdTlLcrRefXxul9DKhRac=; b=T39C8W yGAqzQF6uwW1g+dHTJnxZWpYrtFkxqHuqtSCH8gIIBZLV+lHO3VS/HTs+ldQv7vz M8WhFWvcmyxUFEHSm2H2GWsmPZmLdbCKwD/UWpWDQT0cpCnhIwq9JQX+XIzdOB6Q 6MgNxUQ1UYq/MWb7oJoyXP9I6MNslW/7bAIQA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=DlBKF7xXGzIhUz2AP8wEJqzZ+W2aNi23 3ChJb+knD3VOop6+8j1+XHADAJxj97HrKsG51QRZCCCLgsLxK4PNDKWmzDJbwdl9 yddu0N69s96EbIu2hSXMNI04rCbbsc/gQlsbnEFQeOOax3QIrCE+m+GLrKLrLOPP XWd8Y6hHEwM= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86E282FF48; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 17:18:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0826B2FF47; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 17:18:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Kirill Smelkov Cc: Jeff King , =?utf-8?Q?J=C3=A9rome?= Perrin , Isabelle Vallet , Kazuhiko Shiozaki , Julien Muchembled , git@vger.kernel.org, Vicent Marti Subject: Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: Use reachability bitmap index when generating non-stdout pack too References: <20160725185313.GA13007@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20160727201506.GA15204@teco.navytux.spb.ru> <20160728202237.GC4026@teco.navytux.spb.ru> Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:18:29 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20160728202237.GC4026@teco.navytux.spb.ru> (Kirill Smelkov's message of "Thu, 28 Jul 2016 23:22:37 +0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: D61396F8-5508-11E6-98D5-89D312518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Kirill Smelkov writes: > I'm waiting so long for main patch to be at least queued to pu, that I'm > now a bit frustrated and ready to do something not related to main goal :) Perhaps the first step would be to stop putting multiple patches in a single e-mail buried after a few pages of discussion. I will not even find that there _are_ multiple patches in the message if I am not involved directly in the discussion, and the discussion is still ongoing, because it is likely that I'd skim just a few paragraphs at the top before going on to other messages. I won't touch the message I am responding to, as your -- 8< -- cut mark does not even seem to be a reliable marker between patches (i.e. I see something like this that is clearly not a message boundary: than `git pack-objects file.pack`. Extracting erp5.git pack from lab.nexedi.com backup repository: ---- 8< ---- $ time echo 0186ac99 | git pack-objects --stdout --revs >erp5pack-stdout.pack real 0m22.309s ... )