Jan Zerebecki jzerebecki
  • Not necessarily representing the actions or views of anyone even when stated otherwise. | Profile pic CC-BY 4.0: ESA/Hubble

  • Joined on 2024-05-21
jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#165 2026-03-12 08:53:45 +01:00
common: add TIMELINE_CACHE_DISABLE env var

There is a bug, that updates for any changes that are not causing new creation dates (like comment edits) are discarded. Because the update time is not checked, only the creation date. It is probably safer to always overwrite items in the cache by keying on the id.

jzerebecki approved git-workflow/autogits#126 2026-03-11 10:42:57 +01:00
Use relative paths in project gits

Antonello confirmed testing successful.

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#126 2026-03-10 08:40:04 +01:00
Use relative paths in project gits

Looks good. Not tested, yet.

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#103 2026-02-24 11:02:08 +01:00
common: parser error fix resulting in deadlock

As I'll switch to reviewing another more important PR before this is finished I'll add some general comments I had.

This seems like it implements generic git functionality, so why not use one…

jzerebecki approved git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-17 12:48:52 +01:00
New package handling

Can be merged, previous review was in error. Inline comments can be addressed in followup.

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-17 12:47:19 +01:00
New package handling

Forget this, I totally overlooked the 0 iteration case.

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:03 +01:00
New package handling

I don't think this is intended as this doesn't do everything to handle a repo add issue. Everything below in this function is dead code, due to the return above. This needs to be adressed before merge.

jzerebecki suggested changes for git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:03 +01:00
New package handling

The previous to last inline comment needs to be addressed before merge.

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:02 +01:00
New package handling

Isn't push without force sufficient as the branch does not exist?

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:02 +01:00
New package handling

git push has a --dry-run we should use here

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:02 +01:00
New package handling

Comment should explain why this is here or it should be removed?

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:02 +01:00
New package handling

What do you mean? There is a test below... Is it not finished?

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:02 +01:00
New package handling

There is no comparison before the return that this is expected, is that a mistake?

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:02 +01:00
New package handling

So why is this still here?

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:02 +01:00
New package handling

The difference between this and the above is not understandable from the name. The above is GitDirectoryListFiles and this is GitDirectoryListFilesAndSubmodulesRecursively? Also maybe it is better to move the distinction (recursive, include files, include directories, include submodules) into the arguments.

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#108 2026-02-16 20:43:02 +01:00
New package handling

Unused?

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#120 2026-02-03 11:01:42 +01:00
maintainer-update

Please also add this to %check

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#120 2026-02-03 11:01:42 +01:00
maintainer-update

Test is somehow not implementing description, there is nothing being removed.

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#120 2026-02-03 11:01:42 +01:00
maintainer-update

Move these into run() and remove the global calls, to not duplicate them from main.go and actually test them?

jzerebecki commented on pull request git-workflow/autogits#120 2026-02-03 11:01:42 +01:00
maintainer-update

fsync() missing before rename, without it risks loosing both files.