On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:54 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 6:15 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> 3 & 4 as a single patch may make more sense, if we were to tolerate the >>>> "let's copy & paste first and then later remove the duplicate" as a way to >>>> postpone touching "tag.c" side in order to first concentrate on for-each-ref. >>>> >>>> I have not formed a firm opinion on what the right split of the series is, but >>>> so far (assuming that the temporary duplication is the best we can do) what >>>> I am seeing in this series makes sense to me. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>> >>> That would mean squashing 3&4, 6&7 and 10&11 also on similar lines. >> >> I have a slight preference for keeping the pairs not squashed. This way, >> we have a clear separation "write reusable library code" / "use it". But >> I'm fine with squashing if others prefer. > > As I cannot firmly say that "copy & paste first and then later > clean-up" is bad and we should split them in different way, I > am fine with leaving them separate as they are. Even I think it's better to leave them separate, on the lines of what Matthieu said. -- Regards, Karthik Nayak -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in