From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2026 11:34:41 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] packfile: recover when a multi-pack-index names a removed pack
Message-ID: <20260829113441.GD40814@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <CABPp-BFhPONjNuVZQfgwKuYdgbm5Fjjttz5q5wSYX6j1Zdwdww@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 12:29:49AM -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:

> > We've changed the return value semantics without changing the signature
> > (or name). So we need to make sure we adjust all callers, as here.
> > That's _probably_ OK in practice for such a specialized function. But we
> > could also rename it if we wanted to be paranoid (especially about
> > new callers added on parallel branches).
> 
> Any suggestions for alternate names?  fill_midx_entry_result?  midx_fill_entry?

I did not have a good suggestion, but midx_fill_entry (which it looks
like your new series uses) seems reasonable. It is probably the better
name anyway, as it fits the subsystem_verb_the_thing() ordering.

I'll take a look at the new series and comment further there (if needed;
my fingers are crossed for perfection).

-Peff