Re: [RFC PATCH 00/19] Bring more repository handles into our code base

From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Date: Oct 13, 2018, 00:30 UTC
Message-ID: <CAGZ79ka9L+s8PdREL04MOag-x68SzCc4xHn-JShVFPest6YxZg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20181012185037.GA52080@aiede.svl.corp.google.com>

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:50 AM Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

>
> It appears that some patches use a the_index-style
> NO_THE_REPOSITORY_COMPATIBILITY_MACROS backward compatibility synonym
> and others don't.  Can you say a little more about this aspect of the
> approach?  Would the compatibility macros go away eventually?

I use the macro only when not doing the whole conversion in the patch (i.e. there is a coccinelle patch IFF there is the macro and vice versa).

It's quite frankly a judgement call what I would convert as a whole and what not, it depends on the usage of the functions and if I know series that are in flight using it. The full conversion is easy to write if there are less than a hand full of callers, so for the "small case", I just did it, hoping it won't break other topics in flight.