Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 5:04 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Yeah, I think that would probably make more sense. If a file is small >> enough, it is more sensible to send it to a loose object just like any >> other files. We do not want to invite users to make a mistake of marking >> it as bigdata and send it straight to a packfile. Having one less knob to >> tweak is always a good thing to do. >> >> However, while reviewing your patch, I noticed that convert.c was littered >> with misnamed types, variables and functions to the point to make it >> almost unreadble as the result of its evolution. I originally wrote this >> series so that I can add "bigdata" sensibly, and it turns out that there >> is no benefit to do so for now, but the clean-up by itself would be worth >> it. > > I still don't like "bigdata" attribute. I think we are in agreement. I do not like it anymore and that was what I tried to say in the first paragraph, and that was why I said "it turns out that there is no benefit" in the second paragraph. -- 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