From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 23:00:51 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 27/49] builtin/repack.c: rename various pack_geometry functions
Message-ID: <aOmQI+hpd9OlN/It@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <aOXn9Vd6t_xOjWpQ@pks.im>

On Wed, Oct 08, 2025 at 06:26:29AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2025 at 04:38:33PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 01:22:05AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 28, 2025 at 06:08:54PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/builtin/repack.c b/builtin/repack.c
> > > > index 18c3df7200..2ce1ae3364 100644
> > > > --- a/builtin/repack.c
> > > > +++ b/builtin/repack.c
> > > > @@ -332,7 +332,7 @@ static void geometry_remove_redundant_packs(struct pack_geometry *geometry,
> > > >  	strbuf_release(&buf);
> > > >  }
> > > >
> > > > -static void free_pack_geometry(struct pack_geometry *geometry)
> > > > +static void pack_geometry_release(struct pack_geometry *geometry)
> > > >  {
> > > >  	if (!geometry)
> > > >  		return;
> > >
> > > Okay, this function also gets adjusted for the new naming schema we have
> > > around free/release. Good, but it might be worth it to point it out in
> > > the commit message.
> >
> > I wrote the commit message to be generic to cover "various pack_geometry
> > functions". Did you want me to be more specific about which functions
> > were renamed?
>
> Not in general, no. But I felt that this method here was somewhat
> special because we not only rename to have `pack_geometry_` as prefix,
> but also to use the correct verb.

Aha, sorry, I see what you're saying. I'll make that clearer in my local
version, thanks for suggesting it!

Thanks,
Taylor