From: Alban Gruin <alban.gruin@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2018 15:35:11 GMT
Subject: Re: [GSoC][PATCH v2 1/7] sequencer: make two functions and an enum from sequencer.c public
Message-ID: <d9ee3afd-2464-0a7c-d55f-951b89777d27@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqsh50oyu4.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

Hi Junio,

Le 03/07/2018 à 22:20, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
> Alban Gruin <alban.gruin@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> -enum check_level {
>> -	CHECK_IGNORE = 0, CHECK_WARN, CHECK_ERROR
>> -};
>> -
>> -static enum check_level get_missing_commit_check_level(void)
>> +enum missing_commit_check_level get_missing_commit_check_level(void)
> 
> The new name definitely is better than "check_level" in the global
> context, but "missing_commit" is much less important thing to say
> than "this symbol is to be used when driving 'rebase' (or even
> 'rebase-i')", I think.  "enum rebase_i_drop_commit_check" with
> "get_rebase_i_drop_commit_check()" perhaps?
> 

I don’t really like those names, but the function and the enum should
eventually move to rebase-interactive.c and become static again, so we
could revert their names in due course.

Cheers,
Alban