From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2017 12:00:40 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] pack: move pack name-related functions
Message-ID: <CAP8UFD20_Q7djbJfMmrGEnN3j2NasHyvuNAfZHMr_bNRjO0qpw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170808135001.48f2440e@twelve2.svl.corp.google.com>

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 13:36:24 -0700
> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> There are also packed refs, so one could (like I did) think that
>> pack.c is for generic packing of things, maybe packfile.c
>> would be more clear?
>
> Good point. I'll use packfile.c and packfile.h in the next version.

It looks like you used "packfile.c" and "pack.h" in v2. Is there a
reason why it's not using "packfile.h"?