[GSoC update] Iterating over a stable series

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

The post midterm work is suffering because I'm constantly rewriting
the sequencer-stable series: I often resort to throwing away big
patches that move functions from builtin/revert.c to sequencer.c.
Hopefully, the latest iteration [1] will not require rewriting.

I'd like some early feedback for one of the "design patches" in my new
series: I've chosen to use a commit + action to represent a todo_list.
I'd initially tried a commit + opts keeping future expantion in mind
(allowing instruction-specific command-line options), but the result
is quite inelegant.  Although commit message/ tests are missing, I'd
like to describe the intent in detail:

This patch is a prerequisite for decoupling todo parsing from opts
parsing.  I want to decouple them so that I can achieve tighter
coupling between "git commit" and the sequencer [2].  After that, I
want to craft a nice API and move/ expose various functions in
builtin/revert.c starting with the parsing functions.

Thanks for reading.

[1]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/178372
[2]: http://mid.gmane.org/CALkWK0=9kwgtZB-BA12tOQrQXS8XRbhTg6K=Ak00o2nurX16Fg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Ramkumar Ramachandra (1):
  revert: Allow arbitrary sequencer instructions

 builtin/revert.c |  101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
 sequencer.h      |   10 +++++
 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.6.351.gb35ac.dirty

--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]