>> Will it become helpful to split the proposed patch into smaller update steps? > > This is kind of why the series is 13 patches long, I'm not seeing why > you think the following stats qualify as "long": It seems that we came along different expectations for a desirable change granularity. Intentions influence how known “code problems” can be adjusted (also for this update step). How should following change ideas be handled then? 1. Deletion of the macro “ABORT_ON” 2. Addition of a comment for a special check 3. Introduction of another error message for one failure mode Would you like to adjust the change description another bit? Regards, Markus
