From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 15:39:47 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] bulk-checkin: extract abstract `bulk_checkin_source`
Message-ID: <ZTk2w6rV2y7ZKfQh@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <20231025073736.GB2145145@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 03:37:36AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> I don't mind this in-between state. It is a funny layering violating
> from an OO standpoint, but it's not like we expect an unbounded set of
> concrete types to "inherit" from the source struct.

Yeah, this was exactly my thinking when writing up the changes for this
round. Since all of the "sub-classes" are local to the bulk-checkin.o
compilation unit, I don't have grave concerns about one implementation
peering into the details of another's.

Gotta stop somewhere ;-).

Thanks,
Taylor