Re: [PATCH v2 00/21] object_id part 7

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 28, 2017, 17:32 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqzig5cno8.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170328073159.k3xemw6auh3iedgs@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 13 quoted lines

> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 04:01:22PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
>
>> This is part 7 in the continuing transition to use struct object_id.
>> 
>> This series focuses on two main areas: adding two constants for the
>> maximum hash size we'll be using (which will be suitable for allocating
>> memory) and converting struct sha1_array to struct oid_array.
>
> Both changes are very welcome. I do think it's probably worth changing
> the name of sha1-array.[ch], but it doesn't need to happen immediately.
>
> I read through the whole series and didn't find anything objectionable.
> The pointer-arithmetic fix should perhaps graduate separately.

I didn't see anything incorrect when I queued the series, either, and after I re-read it I saw a few minor readability issues, but modulo that this looks ready. I did split the push-cert parsing fix and applied to an older base independently, though.

Show 5 quoted lines

> I suggested an additional cleanup around "linelen" in one patch. In the
> name of keeping the number of re-rolls sane, I'm OK if we skip that for
> now (the only reason I mentioned it at all is that you have to justify
> the caveat in the commit message; with the fix, that justification can
> go away).

A follow-up after the dust settles could also mention "we earlier mentioned this caveat but with this fix we no longer have to worry about it", no?

Thanks both, anyways.