Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] serialize collection of refs that contain submodule changes
Show 9 quoted lines
> Thanks. So I do not completely get what you are suggesting: args or kept
> it the way it is? Since in the end you are saying it is ok here ;) I
> mainly chose this name because I am substituting the argv variable which
> is already called 'argv' with this array. That might also be the reason
> why in so many locations with struct child_processe's we have the 'argv'
> name: Because they initially started with the old-style NULL terminated
> array.
>
> I am fine with it either way. Just tell me what you like :)
I think it's fine as is here; I was just confused when first seeing this code.
>
> Cheers Heiko
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>