Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Undo Patch abstraction #198

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 5, 2023
Merged

Undo Patch abstraction #198

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 5, 2023

Conversation

ezyang
Copy link
Owner

@ezyang ezyang commented Dec 4, 2023

Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):

I am trying to implement incremental updates and the patch abstraction
is the wrong way to go about doing it, because you in general don't have
a base tree to apply the patch on; you need the full git tree object
somehow. This will break ghexport when we take these updates but it's
going to be complicated to handle anyway, deal with it when we get
there.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang [email protected]

I am trying to implement incremental updates and the patch abstraction
is the wrong way to go about doing it, because you in general don't have
a base tree to apply the patch on; you need the full git tree object
somehow.  This will break ghexport when we take these updates but it's
going to be complicated to handle anyway, deal with it when we get
there.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <[email protected]>

[ghstack-poisoned]
ezyang added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
I am trying to implement incremental updates and the patch abstraction
is the wrong way to go about doing it, because you in general don't have
a base tree to apply the patch on; you need the full git tree object
somehow.  This will break ghexport when we take these updates but it's
going to be complicated to handle anyway, deal with it when we get
there.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <[email protected]>

ghstack-source-id: 3e8841044f95af9f83452ec0daf482dc8dbc12f5
Pull Request resolved: #198
@ezyang ezyang merged commit 9fdb6bf into gh/ezyang/4/base Dec 5, 2023
13 checks passed
ezyang added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2023
I am trying to implement incremental updates and the patch abstraction
is the wrong way to go about doing it, because you in general don't have
a base tree to apply the patch on; you need the full git tree object
somehow.  This will break ghexport when we take these updates but it's
going to be complicated to handle anyway, deal with it when we get
there.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <[email protected]>

ghstack-source-id: 3e8841044f95af9f83452ec0daf482dc8dbc12f5
Pull Request resolved: #198
@ezyang ezyang deleted the gh/ezyang/4/head branch December 5, 2023 09:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant