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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64FCDC433E0 for ; Sat, 25 Jul 2020 01:48:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 176D42070E for ; Sat, 25 Jul 2020 01:48:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="s8JEaJge" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726701AbgGYBsK (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 21:48:10 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:64784 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726592AbgGYBsJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 21:48:09 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FEDF77139; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 21:48:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) 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:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=NNBk0BEZMvbo Yjd4pWjKwnsb2Us=; b=s8JEaJgeS7MDTr0tH9GNKqJqS5GPxCM60n/40ID0PNFN KANlDpS/O5MmzA27A+7mwkFckHE35pKnTM+wnHWxbIU02Fr0waGhR/kEE+FHSylC CySvAiOHfSQnUYQZidmZ53ScfE/S7sCSbszmsJB+x/Nfx2Z9n3gTQzbehS9bMO4= 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:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Z3Ccet X+5UConF8Y+FRJrC2j+1qaiBNqevDJTMgq7q7FQpiH+6MF5bbtjZJj0gwyy4VWTl A7ZRrrD/53ch4eD5XjF4j1NEGhsdM7xBWq40I+zd94vKZsicdMSvefezufEJ60VP yTKO3P4Zsyjxy1dLeb7Mat4M6+hFQn99q8dVI= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C3D77138; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 21:48:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F009977136; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 21:48:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?xJBvw6BuIFRy4bqnbiBDw7RuZw==?= Danh Cc: Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de, sandals@crustytoothpaste.net, steadmon@google.com, jrnieder@gmail.com, peff@peff.net, phillip.wood123@gmail.com, emilyshaffer@google.com, sluongng@gmail.com, jonathantanmy@google.com, Derrick Stolee , Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/18] maintenance: add prefetch task References: <3165b8916d2d80bf72dac6596a42c871ccd4cbe6.1595527000.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> <20200725013715.GA2436@danh.dev> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 18:48:06 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200725013715.GA2436@danh.dev> (=?utf-8?B?IsSQb8OgbiBUcg==?= =?utf-8?B?4bqnbiBDw7RuZw==?= Danh"'s message of "Sat, 25 Jul 2020 08:37:15 +0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E2EF1C66-CE18-11EA-84D3-01D9BED8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C4=90o=C3=A0n Tr=E1=BA=A7n C=C3=B4ng Danh writes= : >> When running 'git fetch ' in the background, use >> the following options for careful updating: > > Does this job interfere with FETCH_HEAD? > From my quick test (by applying 01-08 on top of rc1, and messing with t= 7900), > it looks like yes. > > I (and some other people, probably) rely on FETCH_HEAD for our scripts. > Hence, it would be nice to not touch FETCH_HEAD with prefetch job. Very good point. For that, Derrick may want to swallow the single patch from 'jc/no-update-fetch-head' topic into this series and pass the new command line option.