Re: [PATCH v5 02/12] ref-filter: use strbuf_split_str_omit_term()

> > Did you consider just using string_list_split for this? AFAICT, you
> > don't care about the results being strbufs themselves, and it would do
> > what you want without having to bother with patch 1. [...]
> >
> > Sorry to waltz into a review of v5 with a suggestion to throw out all
> > the work done in previous iterations. :-/ I just think the strbuf_split
> > interface is kind of clunky and I'd be happy if we could slowly get rid
> > of it rather than growing it. [...]
> 
> That's a nice idea, however, I'm not sure if making it part of this
> series this late in the game is a good idea. The series has gone
> through major changes and heavy review in each of the preceding
> versions, and turnaround time has been consequently quite slow (due
> both to the amount of work required by Karthik for each version, and
> to the amount of time needed by reviewers to digest all the new
> changes). v4 was the first one which had settled to the point where
> only minor changes were needed, and we were hoping to land the series
> with v5. (A few larger changes were also discussed in v4 reviews, but
> we concluded that they could be done as follow-up patches.)
> 
> With that in mind, it might be better to make this change as a
> followup to this series. On the other hand, as you say, waiting would
> expand the strbuf_split interface undesirably, so the alternative
> would be for Karthik to submit v6 with this change only (to wit: drop
> patch 1 and rewrite patch 2 as you've shown). While such a change will
> again require careful review, at least it is well localized, and
> Karthik's turnaround time shouldn't be too bad. So...