Re: [PATCH 00/19] midx: incremental multi-pack indexes, part one

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Jun 7, 2024, 20:31 UTC
Message-ID: <ZmNuEinqUV7DJQKQ@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqwmn0d4dc.fsf@gitster.g>

On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 10:55:43AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:
>
> > Part three doesn't exist yet, but is straightforward to do on top. None
> > of the design decisions made in this series inhibit my goals for part
> > three.
>
> Nice to always see the bigger picture to come to understand where
> the current series fits, but the above is a bit peculiar thing to
> say.  Of course there should be no design decision the currently
> posted series makes that would block your future work---otherwise
> you would not be posting it.i

Yeah. What I was trying to say was that part two actually exists, and works in practice rather than just thinking that it would work without having actually demonstrated anything ;-).

> The real question is rather the future and yet to be written work is
> still feasible after the design decisions the current series made are
> found to be broken and need to be revised (if it happens---but we do
> not know until we see reviews).

Indeed. I'll make sure that before I push out a new round that the rebased part two still works as I expect it to.

Certainly all of this could be avoided by combining the two together, but I think the result is just too large to review.

Thanks, Taylor