Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] Rename suffixcmp() to ends_with() and invert its result

From: Antoine Pelisse <apelisse@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 19, 2013, 21:32 UTC
Message-ID: <CALWbr2yG7XOhuZa9bf6sXRV=m49dTPNyPZ9JUU2-_2G8ZJsCTg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20131119.220438.1634671089949485179.chriscool@tuxfamily.org>

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> To avoid spamming the list again, I am going to send the following
> patches from the 86 patch long series to replace prefixcmp() with
> starts_with():
>
> [PATCH v2 00/86] replace prefixcmp() with starts_with()
> [PATCH v2 01/86] strbuf: add starts_with() to be used instead of prefixcmp()
> [PATCH v2 02/86] diff: replace prefixcmp() with starts_with()
> [PATCH v2 08/86] transport*: replace prefixcmp() with starts_with()
> [PATCH v2 40/86] environment: replace prefixcmp() with starts_with()
> [PATCH v2 86/86] strbuf: remove prefixcmp() as it has been replaced with starts_with()
>
> If there are no problems with them, then I will suppose that most of
> the patches are ok and probably send them all unless I am asked not
> to.

I'm not exactly sure I understand the point of not squashing all those patches together ? It's not like one is going without the others, or that the commit message provides some new information (except for the name of the file, but that is not very relevant either). The downside is that it's _many_ messages to bypass when reading mails from small-screen devices :-)