Weird: I only got the Cc for this, git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx didnt' sent it to me. It
doesn't seem to be on gmane either.
* Junio C Hamano (gitster@xxxxxxxxx) [100215 01:51]:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> >>> builtin-send-pack.c | 89 ++++++++++++++----------
> >>> send-pack.h | 20 +++++
> >>> transport.c | 196 ---------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> I think this is backwards. The versions in send-pack were there first,
> >> and then were ported to transport.c so that other transports could
> >> benefit from them. And that is where they should ultimately be.
> >
> > Also the names of these functions probably need to be made more specific
> > so that people not so familiar with the transport code can tell that they
> > are from "transport" family. The names didn't matter much while they were
> > file scope static, but this series changes that.
>
> Ah, one more thing. I think this patch touches somewhat overlapping areas
> the ld/push-porcelain topic in 'pu' touches.
>
> I think Peff's "backwards" observation is correct (and Daniel can
> elaborate if he wants). Once the direction is set on that point, you and
> Larry probably would need to coordinate to decide how to proceed. My gut
> feeling without actually looking at the conflicts is that applying your
> code consolidation first and then doing the "porcelain" rework on top
> might be a cleaner approach, but you two are in better position to decide
> on the order, as these are your codes that will be conflicting with each
> other.
That sounds good to me. I'll rebase the porcelain stuff off the next version of
Michael's series.
--larry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html