From: Patrick Steinhardt Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2026 06:34:59 GMT Subject: Re: ps/object-info-bits-cleanup Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 09:35:27AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Patrick Steinhardt writes: > > > On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 02:21:34PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> * ps/object-info-bits-cleanup (2026-01-26) 3 commits > >> - odb: drop gaps in object info flag values > >> - builtin/fsck: fix flags passed to `odb_has_object()` > >> - builtin/backfill: fix flags passed to `odb_has_object()` > >> > >> A couple of bugs in use of flag bits around odb API has been > >> corrected, and the flag bits reordered. > >> > >> Comments? > >> source: <20260126-b4-pks-read-object-info-flags-v1-0-e682a003b17c@pks.im> > > > > The discussion on this series has wound down by now, but I'm not sure > > whether anything actionable came out of it. The biggest question was > > around whether or not to use an enum as parameter or an unsigned > > integer, but there wasn't really a clear conclusion. > > > > Should I reroll this series to convert it to an enum, or should I keep > > this as-is and then we can merge this series down? > > I do not think we want to go the route that was proposed in > , but it's your call. As I said in > , it would make sense to change > parameters that functions that deal with these constants to take > enum instead of unsigned, if we were to turn "#define" into enum. > It can be done on top as a clean-up if the theme of this topic were > something more substantial, but this topic largely being a clean-up > itself, I am not sure what the optics would be to have a clean-up > topic that requires further clean-up ;-). Okay. Let me send another version then that does this clean-up on top. Thanks! Patrick