Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] revamping git_check_attr() API

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: May 18, 2016, 18:36 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqk2irrz6w.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kYLVDkeHUMCxOB57YYeJt3f4O8csEp_tyO-oWMTzJ-9hw@mail.gmail.com>

Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:

Show 9 quoted lines

>> The patches in the earliest part of the series have been sent to the
>> list already; there is no substantial change (I think I made a
>> typofix in the commit log message found by Eric).
>
> and a new patch got added here:
>
>     attr.c: tighten constness around "git_attr" structure
>
> I cannot find it on the list though?

Just like everybody else has private "wip" version to be sent to the list, I have my own. I haven't had enough time to cook v3 yet into a publishable state yet.

> So I wondered when you prefix the subject of the patches with "attr.c:"
> and when with "attr:".

The early ones with label attr.c are meant to be "good clean-ups, whether we decide to go with API update or not, that can live standalone outside the series"; the remainders may have been better labeled with fully-spelled "attributes:", perhaps, as that is not about the attr.c file alone, but is about the whole attributes subsystem.