On 06/08/2016 08:55 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ramsay Jones <ramsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> >> Hi Michael, Junio, >> >> I would normally ask you to squash this into the relevant patch when >> you next re-roll your 'mh/ref-iterators' branch, but this has already >> been merged into next. (I normally have a bit more time ... sorry!). >> >> Perhaps, after the release, when the next branch is re-wound/re-built, >> this could be squashed into your branch then. > > Yup, sounds like a plan. > >> >> Anyway, after applying this patch, the following symbols are still >> 'public but unused': >> >> > refs/files-backend.o - files_reflog_iterator_begin >> > refs/iterator.o - is_empty_ref_iterator >> > refs/iterator.o - merge_ref_iterator_begin >> >> These all look (potentially) useful for the implementation of >> additional 'ref-iter' types and look to be part of the _internal_ >> iterator API - so they should not be marked static. Can you just >> confirm my interpretation. > > I am not Michael, but FWIW I think that is sensible. I *am* Michael, and I think your changes look good. Thanks for your review. I've incorporated your changes with some other changes in a re-roll [1] in case Junio wants to use it in that form. Please note that two of the hunks that you are suggesting apply to "refs: introduce an iterator interface" and the third to "for_each_reflog(): reimplement using iterators". Michael [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/296883 -- 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