n 26/08/12 19:46, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> However, the shared bits are simple enough that maybe that is not a >>> concern. An interesting test would be to add a 5/4 porting Erik's win32 >>> credential helper, since that is the platform least like our other ones. >> >> Very true. In principle, I agree that with the current set of helper implementations, the generic infrastructure may not yet pay off. >>> So I am OK with this series, but I am also OK with leaving it at patch >>> 1, and just keeping the implementations separate. >> >> Amen. > > Just to make sure we do not leave loose ends, could somebody try to > see if the new "generic helper" infrastructure is useful to shrink > Erik's win32 credential helper implementation? I'll try to give it a shot now, although I won't be able to test it. I'll send the results as a single 5/4 addition to the previous series. > If we see much code reduction and improved clarity, this refactoring > may worth keeping. Otherwise it may be sufficient to drop the later > ones in the series. Without knowing which, it is hard to decide. If we decide that the generic implementation is useful, I'll then resend the reordered series adding the generic helper first, then refactoring the existing ones and adding the new one for GnomeKeyring last. Thanks, Philipp -- 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