Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] object-store: carve out the object database subsystem

From: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
Date: May 12, 2025, 18:33 UTC
Message-ID: <21bccc17-7e8a-47cc-a48f-de16bf075e54@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq8qn5zci8.fsf@gitster.g>

On 5/9/2025 5:43 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
> 
>> Changes in v2:
>>   - Fix for a copy-and-pasted commit message.
>>   - Rename `struct odb_backend` to `struct odb_alternate`. I'm happy to
>>     revert to the previous name if we ultimately think it's the better
>>     suited one.
> 
> Diff between the previous iteration is quite noisy due to this; I do
> not have strong opinion for or against either name myself.

I agree the range-diff is noisy, so I had to reread the patches.

Thankfully, the patch organization was already pretty good, so it was quick to validate that my earlier concerns were handled.

Show 11 quoted lines

>>   - A couple of fixes to move changes into the correct commit. `git
>>     rebase -x 'meson compile -C build'` is now clean.
> 
> Good to see that we care about bisectability.
> 
>>   - I _didn't_ back out the rename to "odb.{c,h}". Junio has already
>>     fixed the fallout, so it's probably more work for him to kick it out
>>     again than to just leave it in.
> 
> You do not have to make me an excuse, if popular demand is not to
> rename; I can cope with either one fine.

I'm happy that you considered my advice as necessary.

Since the rename doesn't appear to have huge implications for ongoing series, I won't voice any further objections to this rename.

v2 LGTM.

Thanks, -Stolee