develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from February 2020

Re: The great dead-branch prune part 1

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Karl Williamson
Date:
February 9, 2020 19:02
Subject:
Re: The great dead-branch prune part 1
Message ID:
9da4a4ce-1eb0-99cd-3567-2796e3d1988d@khwilliamson.com
On 2/9/20 10:22 AM, demerphq wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 17:52, demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com 
> <mailto:demerphq@gmail.com>> wrote:

I'm sorry.  Those branches of mine were deletable.  But they are both 
works-in-progress, with more commits that I have made locally but it 
turns out not yet pushed to smoke.

I think that if this is going to be done again, that branches that have 
been worked on in say, the last 3 or 6 months, should be excluded from 
review.

And do we really need to keep around stuff that hasn't been touched in a 
decade?
> 
> 
>     Branch origin/smoke-me/khw-wild
>     This branch has 3 commits.
>     merge-base is: 813e85a03dc214f719dc8248bda36156897b0757 -
>     v5.31.6-121-g813e85a03d
>     All commits are upstream:
>     in blead [-] patch-id upstream
>        author            : Karl Williamson <khw@cpan.org
>     <mailto:khw@cpan.org>>
>        subject           : regexec.c: Clarify comment
>        blead commit date : 2019-12-11 07:30:17 -0700 - 9 weeks ago
>        blead sha1        : c5d31466e2689b92b744444fa4659738b9980833
>        blead describe    : v5.31.6-129-gc5d31466e2
>        branch sha1       : 2fb88d9fbecf79f96b438166b4c3cd233438a0c8
>        branch describe   : v5.31.6-124-g2fb88d9fbe
>     in blead [-] patch-id upstream
>        author            : Karl Williamson <khw@cpan.org
>     <mailto:khw@cpan.org>>
>        subject           : Rmv leading underscore from macro name
>        blead commit date : 2019-12-11 07:30:17 -0700 - 9 weeks ago
>        blead sha1        : d1c7f3436a105c18cc516aac6a7447e185b2bc8a
>        blead describe    : v5.31.6-128-gd1c7f3436a
>        branch sha1       : e050d739834a497f146002b26f2bf72dd3ef5c8a
>        branch describe   : v5.31.6-123-ge050d73983
>     msg only in branch [-] patch-id upstream
>        author            : Karl Williamson <khw@cpan.org
>     <mailto:khw@cpan.org>>
>        subject           : Only allow punct delimiter for subpattern
>        branch commit date: 2019-12-09 20:37:29 -0700 - 9 weeks ago
>        branch sha1       : 93c07a985e7fc7872598f96cab462e36e7fbaaa6
>        branch describe   : v5.31.6-122-g93c07a985e
>     Recommend that this branch be deleted.
> 
> 
> BTW, the logic that does git-cherry is the same  logic that is used by 
> rebase. Watch what happens if I rebase smoke-me/khw-wild. (Note my 
> prompt shows my current branch and directory):
> 
> blead:~/git_tree/perl$ git pull
> remote: Enumerating objects: 5, done.
> remote: Counting objects: 100% (5/5), done.
> remote: Total 5 (delta 4), reused 5 (delta 4), pack-reused 0
> Unpacking objects: 100% (5/5), done.
>  From github.com:Perl/perl5
>     4b16e2bb0c..ff788636f0  blead      -> origin/blead
> Updating 4b16e2bb0c..ff788636f0
> Fast-forward
>   t/op/signame_canonical.t | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> blead:~/git_tree/perl$ git log -1 --oneline
> ff788636f0 (HEAD -> blead, origin/blead, origin/HEAD) skip 
> op/signame_canonical test under miniperl
> 
> blead:~/git_tree/perl$ git checkout smoke-me/khw-wild
> Branch 'smoke-me/khw-wild' set up to track remote branch 
> 'smoke-me/khw-wild' from 'origin'.
> Switched to a new branch 'smoke-me/khw-wild'
> 
> smoke-me/khw-wild:~/git_tree/perl$ git rebase origin/blead
> First, rewinding head to replay your work on top of it...
> 
> smoke-me/khw-wild:~/git_tree/perl$ git log -1 --oneline
> ff788636f0 (HEAD -> smoke-me/khw-wild, origin/blead, origin/HEAD, blead) 
> skip op/signame_canonical test under miniperl
> 
> As you can see, once you rebase that branch it becomes empty, and the 
> reason is that all of its published contents has already been merged.
> 
> The point being the machinery I used to determine which branches can be 
> deleted is the same machinary that would kick in if you tried to merge 
> your branch /as published/ to blead on github or locally. It would be a 
> no-op, because it is all already in blead.
> 
> I was going to attach the reports I have done, but they are rather 
> large, so I think I will just push the script tomorrow morning and 
> people can run it themselves.
> 
> cheers,
> Yves

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About