From: Thiago Farina Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2010 12:18:47 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit: Add commit_list prefix to reduce_heads function. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20101205021837.GA24614@burratino> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Thiago Farina wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Thiago Farina > > I know that the context is part of an effort to make the commit_list > functions into something more of a self-contained API, but the > reader does not know that.  Perhaps you could say some words about > that in the change description: what's wrong with the current > situation, what context does this change come from, and what positive > effect would it have? > > Beyond that, I must say I do not think this goes far enough to seem > useful.  If I wondered what reduce_heads did, wouldn't > commit_list_reduce_heads be even more confusing? (ignoring the typo) > > Perhaps a more natural way to proceed would be as follows: > >  . first, collect the functions to be treated as a module and >   list them in Documentation/technical (in this case, perhaps >   api-revision-walking or a new api-commit-list) > What you want here? That I describe the functions in these files? Why me? Why not the person who wrote them? >  . next, describe their current meaning.  If this requires >   apologizing for the name, Apologize? For what? I don't understand what you mean here. > that's a good hint that a name  change might be worthwhile > >  . finally, tweak signatures (names and arguments) based on the >   results from step 2 and update the documentation at the same >   time. > I'd prefer to do just that step. > That way, people used to the current functions would at least have > some documentation to help them adjust.  What do you think? > I think it's a good procedure for someone more familiar with this functions to do this. Perhaps, you or Junio?