Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

[Michael Haggerty]

On 09/19/2016 07:27 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano  writes:
> 
>> Michael Haggerty  writes:
>>
>>> On 09/08/2016 01:25 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
 I'd move it temporarily to t4061 with a separate SQUASH??? at the
 tip for now, as I am running out of time today.
>>>
>>> I didn't realize you were waiting for an ACK. Yes, it's totally OK to
>>> rename the test.
>>
>> I actually wasn't asking for an Ack.
>>
>> As the issue was in the one that is buried a few commits from the
>> tip, and there is a later one that adds more tests to it, I didn't
>> find enough energy to rename the new file in a buried commit and
>> then adjust the patch later updates it, I was hoping that you'd
>> reroll to save me effort, rather than forcing me to do the rebase
>> myself ;-).
> 
> Now I did, so no need to resend (unless you have changes other than
> the renaming of the test script, that is).

Thanks for taking care of this.

> Let's move it down to 'next' soonish.

Yes, it would be good to get feedback early enough in the cycle that we
can make a final decision about which diff heuristics should be used by
default and whether/what UI to implement for switching between them.

Michael

Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

[Junio C Hamano]

Junio C Hamano  writes:

> Michael Haggerty  writes:
>
>> On 09/08/2016 01:25 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> I'd move it temporarily to t4061 with a separate SQUASH??? at the
>>> tip for now, as I am running out of time today.
>>
>> I didn't realize you were waiting for an ACK. Yes, it's totally OK to
>> rename the test.
>
> I actually wasn't asking for an Ack.
>
> As the issue was in the one that is buried a few commits from the
> tip, and there is a later one that adds more tests to it, I didn't
> find enough energy to rename the new file in a buried commit and
> then adjust the patch later updates it, I was hoping that you'd
> reroll to save me effort, rather than forcing me to do the rebase
> myself ;-).

Now I did, so no need to resend (unless you have changes other than
the renaming of the test script, that is).

Let's move it down to 'next' soonish.

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

[Junio C Hamano]

Michael Haggerty  writes:

> On 09/08/2016 01:25 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Michael Haggerty  writes:
>> 
>>>   * Add test t4059 as part of this commit, not as part of its
>>> successor.
>> 
>> Which needs to be moved to somewhere else, as another topics that
>> has already been in 'next' uses t4059.
>> 
>> I'd move it temporarily to t4061 with a separate SQUASH??? at the
>> tip for now, as I am running out of time today.
>
> I didn't realize you were waiting for an ACK. Yes, it's totally OK to
> rename the test.

I actually wasn't asking for an Ack.

As the issue was in the one that is buried a few commits from the
tip, and there is a later one that adds more tests to it, I didn't
find enough energy to rename the new file in a buried commit and
then adjust the patch later updates it, I was hoping that you'd
reroll to save me effort, rather than forcing me to do the rebase
myself ;-).

Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

[Junio C Hamano]

Michael Haggerty  writes:

>   * Add test t4059 as part of this commit, not as part of its
> successor.

Which needs to be moved to somewhere else, as another topics that
has already been in 'next' uses t4059.

I'd move it temporarily to t4061 with a separate SQUASH??? at the
tip for now, as I am running out of time today.

Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

[Jacob Keller]

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Junio C Hamano  wrote:
> Michael Haggerty  writes:
>
>> * In "blame: honor the diff heuristic options and config":
>>
>>   * In v2, I suggested making `blame` honor all diff-related options.
>> Junio explained why this was a bad idea. So this version only
>> makes `blame` honor `--indent-heuristic` and
>> `--compaction-heuristic`.
>
> This makes a lot more sense to me.  I am not sure if it is worth
> adding 7/8 to expose these experimental knobs to the end users, but
> the amount of the code needed is very small, so let's take it.
>
> I am hoping that we can lose both of the experimental knobs and use
> the indent heuristic unconditionally in the future, though ;-)
>
> Thanks.
>


Agreed, I think we should drop the knobs and use the feature
unconditionally as well.

Thanks,
Jake

Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

[Junio C Hamano]

Michael Haggerty  writes:

> * In "blame: honor the diff heuristic options and config":
>
>   * In v2, I suggested making `blame` honor all diff-related options.
> Junio explained why this was a bad idea. So this version only
> makes `blame` honor `--indent-heuristic` and
> `--compaction-heuristic`.

This makes a lot more sense to me.  I am not sure if it is worth
adding 7/8 to expose these experimental knobs to the end users, but
the amount of the code needed is very small, so let's take it.

I am hoping that we can lose both of the experimental knobs and use
the indent heuristic unconditionally in the future, though ;-)

Thanks.