From a347bca37fb34be3af9a6812ba7bbcbd87ce095e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 21:44:16 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] What's cooking (2008/07 #10)

---
 whats-cooking.txt | 198 +++++++++++++---------------------------------
 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 142 deletions(-)

diff --git a/whats-cooking.txt b/whats-cooking.txt
index 7be6a1ea13..51cba066d1 100644
--- a/whats-cooking.txt
+++ b/whats-cooking.txt
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
-Subject: What's cooking in git.git (Jul 2008, issue #09; Sun, 20)
+Subject: What's cooking in git.git (Jul 2008, #11; Thu, 31)
 
-What's cooking in git.git (Jul 2008, issue #09; Sun, 20)
---------------------------------------------------------
+What's cooking in git.git (Jul 2008, #11; Thu, 31)
+--------------------------------------------------
 
 Here are the topics that have been cooking.  Commits prefixed
 with '-' are only in 'pu' while commits prefixed with '+' are
@@ -19,160 +19,75 @@ to do without regression.
 
 Tentative schedule, my wishful thinking:
 
- - 1.6.0-rc0 (Jul 20)
- - 1.6.0-rc1 (Jul 23)
- - 1.6.0-rc2 (Jul 30)
- - 1.6.0-rc3 (Aug  6)
- - 1.6.0     (Aug 10)
+ - 1.6.0-rc2 (Aug  3)
+ - 1.6.0-rc3 (Aug 10)
 
 ----------------------------------------------------------------
 [New Topics]
 
-* pb/sane-mv (Mon Jul 21 02:25:56 2008 +0200) 2 commits
- - git-mv: Keep moved index entries inact
- - git-mv: Remove dead code branch
+* rs/archive-parse-options (Fri Jul 25 12:41:26 2008 +0200) 1 commit
+ + archive: allow --exec and --remote without equal sign
 
-Running "git mv A B" when you have local changes to A automatically staged
-it while moving it to B, which was a longstanding nonsense.  This attempts
-to fix it.  Pasky has other plans to build on a more solidified foundation
-to enhance the command to work with submodules better on top of this.
+None of the following is for 1.6.0.
+
+* mv/merge-custom (Thu Jul 31 00:38:07 2008 +0200) 5 commits
+ + builtin-help: always load_command_list() in cmd_help()
+ + Add a second testcase for handling invalid strategies in git-merge
+ + Add a new test for using a custom merge strategy
+ + builtin-merge: allow using a custom strategy
+ + builtin-help: make some internal functions available to other
+   builtins
+
+* cc/merge-base-many (Sun Jul 27 13:47:22 2008 -0700) 4 commits
+ - git-merge-octopus: use (merge-base A (merge B C D E...)) for
+   stepwise merge
+ + merge-base-many: add trivial tests based on the documentation
+ + documentation: merge-base: explain "git merge-base" with more than
+   2 args
+ + merge-base: teach "git merge-base" to drive underlying
+   merge_bases_many()
+
+* jc/simplify-merges (Thu Jul 31 01:17:41 2008 -0700) 1 commit
+ . revision traversal: show full history with merge simplification
+
+"log --full-history" is with too much clutter, "log" itself is too cleverer
+than some people, and here is the middle level of merge simplification.
 
 ----------------------------------------------------------------
-[Graduated to "master"]
+[On Hold and/or Cooking]
 
-* ns/am-abort (Wed Jul 16 19:39:10 2008 +0900) 1 commit
- + git am --abort
-
-This one is for Ted; builds on top of the recent "am and rebase leaves
-ORIG_HEAD just like reset, merge and pull does" rather nicely.
-
-* jc/rerere-auto-more (Wed Jul 16 20:25:18 2008 -0700) 1 commit
- + rerere.autoupdate: change the message when autoupdate is in effect
-
-This one is for Ingo.
-
-This changes the message rerere issues after reusing previous conflict
-resolution from "Resolved" to "Staged" when autoupdate option is in
-effect.
-
-It is envisioned that in practice, some auto resolutions are trickier and
-iffier than others, and we would want to add a feature to mark individual
-resolutions as "this is ok to autoupdate" or "do not autoupdate the result
-using this resolution even when rerere.autoupdate is in effect" in the
-future.  When that happens, these messages will make the distinction
-clearer.
-
-* ap/trackinfo (Wed Jul 16 15:19:27 2008 -0400) 1 commit
- + Reword "your branch has diverged..." lines to reduce line length
-
-* xx/merge-in-c-into-next (Wed Jul 9 13:51:46 2008 -0700) 4 commits
- + Teach git-merge -X<option> again.
- + Merge branch 'jc/merge-theirs' into xx/merge-in-c-into-next
- + builtin-merge.c: use parse_options_step() "incremental parsing"
-   machinery
- + Merge branch 'ph/parseopt-step-blame' into xx/merge-in-c-into-next
-
-* jc/merge-theirs (Fri Jul 18 02:43:00 2008 -0700) 6 commits
- - Document that merge strategies can now take their own options
- + Make "subtree" part more orthogonal to the rest of merge-
-   recursive.
- + Teach git-pull to pass -X<option> to git-merge
- + Teach git-merge to pass -X<option> to the backend strategy module
- + git-merge-recursive-{ours,theirs}
- + git-merge-file --ours, --theirs
-
-It appears nobody wants "theirs" nor "ours", so I'll soon apply a
-wholesale revert for these series to 'next', and then these will be
-dropped when we rewind 'next' after 1.6.0 final.
-
-Please make sure next time somebody asks "ours/theirs" merge on the list
-and #git s/he is quickly told that it was unanimously rejected so that
-people do not have to waste time rehashing the topic ever again.
-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-[Stalled/Needs more work]
+None of the following is for 1.6.0.
 
 * rs/imap (Wed Jul 9 22:29:02 2008 +0100) 5 commits
- - Documentation: Improve documentation for git-imap-send(1)
- - imap-send.c: more style fixes
- - imap-send.c: style fixes
- - git-imap-send: Support SSL
- - git-imap-send: Allow the program to be run from subdirectories of
+ + Documentation: Improve documentation for git-imap-send(1)
+ + imap-send.c: more style fixes
+ + imap-send.c: style fixes
+ + git-imap-send: Support SSL
+ + git-imap-send: Allow the program to be run from subdirectories of
    a git tree
 
-I said: "Some people seem to prefer having this feature available also
-with gnutls.  If such a patch materializes soon, that would be good, but
-otherwise I'll merge this as-is to 'next'.  Such an enhancement can be
-done in-tree on top of this series."  Anybody?
+Some people seem to prefer having this feature available also with gnutls.
+Such an enhancement can be done in-tree on top of this series if they are
+so inclined.
 
-* gi/cherry-cache (Sat Jul 12 20:14:51 2008 -0700) 1 commit
- . cherry: cache patch-ids to avoid repeating work
+* cc/bisect (Fri Jul 25 05:36:37 2008 +0200) 2 commits
+ - bisect: only check merge bases when needed
+ - bisect: test merge base if good rev is not an ancestor of bad rev
 
-The discussion suggested that the value of having the cache itself is
-iffy, but I should pick up the updated one and look at it.
+* jc/add-addremove (Tue Jul 22 22:30:40 2008 -0700) 2 commits
+ + builtin-add.c: optimize -A option and "git add ."
+ + builtin-add.c: restructure the code for maintainability
 
-* lw/gitweb (Fri Jul 11 03:11:48 2008 +0200) 3 commits
- . gitweb: use new Git::Repo API, and add optional caching
- . Add new Git::Repo API
- . gitweb: add test suite with Test::WWW::Mechanize::CGI
+* jk/pager-swap (Tue Jul 22 03:14:12 2008 -0400) 2 commits
+ + spawn pager via run_command interface
+ + run-command: add pre-exec callback
 
-* sb/sequencer (Tue Jul 1 04:38:34 2008 +0200) 4 commits
- . Migrate git-am to use git-sequencer
- . Add git-sequencer test suite (t3350)
- . Add git-sequencer prototype documentation
- . Add git-sequencer shell prototype
+This changes the parent-child relationship between the pager and the git
+process.  We used to make pager the parent which meant that the exit
+status from git is lost from the caller.
 
-I haven't looked at the updated series yet.  I should, but nobody else
-seems to be looking at these patches, which is somewhat depressing but
-understandable.  Summer is slower ;-)
-
-* jc/grafts (Wed Jul 2 17:14:12 2008 -0700) 1 commit
- - [BROKEN wrt shallow clones] Ignore graft during object transfer
-
-Cloning or fetching from a repository from grafts did not send objects
-that are hidden by grafts, but the commits in the resulting repository do
-need these to pass fsck.  This fixes object transfer to ignore grafts.
-
-Another fix is needed to git-prune so that it ignores grafts but treats
-commits that are mentioned in grafts as reachable.
-
-* jc/blame (Wed Jun 4 22:58:40 2008 -0700) 2 commits
- - blame: show "previous" information in --porcelain/--incremental
-   format
- - git-blame: refactor code to emit "porcelain format" output
-
-This is for peeling the line from the blamed version to see what's behind
-it, which may or may not help applications like gitweb.
-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-[Dropped]
-
-* xx/merge-in-c-into-next (Wed Jul 9 13:51:46 2008 -0700) 4 commits
- + Teach git-merge -X<option> again.
- + Merge branch 'jc/merge-theirs' into xx/merge-in-c-into-next
- + builtin-merge.c: use parse_options_step() "incremental parsing"
-   machinery
- + Merge branch 'ph/parseopt-step-blame' into xx/merge-in-c-into-next
-
-* jc/merge-theirs (Fri Jul 18 02:43:00 2008 -0700) 6 commits
- - Document that merge strategies can now take their own options
- + Make "subtree" part more orthogonal to the rest of merge-
-   recursive.
- + Teach git-pull to pass -X<option> to git-merge
- + Teach git-merge to pass -X<option> to the backend strategy module
- + git-merge-recursive-{ours,theirs}
- + git-merge-file --ours, --theirs
-
-It appears nobody wants "theirs" nor "ours", so I'll soon apply a
-wholesale revert for these series to 'next', and then these will be
-dropped when we rewind 'next' after 1.6.0 final.
-
-Please make sure next time somebody asks "ours/theirs" merge on the list
-and #git s/he is quickly told that it was unanimously rejected so that
-people do not have to waste time rehashing the topic ever again.
-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-[On Hold]
+* ph/enable-threaded (Mon Jul 21 11:23:43 2008 +0200) 1 commit
+ + Enable threaded delta search on *BSD and Linux.
 
 * sg/merge-options (Sun Apr 6 03:23:47 2008 +0200) 1 commit
  + merge: remove deprecated summary and diffstat options and config
@@ -192,9 +107,8 @@ This is the "botched" one.  Will be resurrected during 1.7.0 or 1.8.0
 timeframe.
 
 * jk/renamelimit (Sat May 3 13:58:42 2008 -0700) 1 commit
- - diff: enable "too large a rename" warning when -M/-C is explicitly
+ . diff: enable "too large a rename" warning when -M/-C is explicitly
    asked for
 
 This would be the right thing to do for command line use, but gitk will be
 hit due to tcl/tk's limitation, so I am holding this back for now.
-