From: Quint Guvernator <quintus.public@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:51:53 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] general style: replaces memcmp() with proper starts_with()
Message-ID: <CALs4jVHcPFjf-12mXvvSxctNJZgLD=P3=57u6_FYePDOB7txQQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140314045758.GA32748@sigill.intra.peff.net>

2014-03-14 0:57 GMT-04:00 Jeff King <peff@peff.net>:
> This discussion ended up encompassing a lot of other related cleanups. I
> hope we didn't scare you away. :)

I don't think you could; this community is much more accepting than
other software communities around the web. The fact that I received
constructive feedback rather than a lecture when formatting issues
slipped my mind (i.e. forgetting [PATCH v2]) is reason enough to stick
around!

> My understanding is that you were approaching this as a micro-project
> for GSoC. I'd love it if you want to pick up and run with some of the
> ideas discussed here. But as far as a microproject goes, I think it
> would make sense to identify one or two no-brainer improvement spots by
> hand, and submit a patch with just those (and I think Junio gave some
> good guidelines in his reply).

I agree with trying to push a few uncontroversial changes through. I'd
love to take a deeper look at these helper functions and related
cleanups…perhaps it would be worth it to identify a few key areas to
work on in addition to a main GSoC project? In fact, the project I'm
looking to take on (rebase --interactive) also involves code cleanup
and might not take all summer, so I could see how those could work
well together in a proposal.

I'll be re-reading this thread and working on this patch over the
weekend to try to identify the more straightforward hunks I could
submit in a patch.

Thanks Peff and everyone else for your help.
Quint