On 4/30/07, Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Dana How <danahow@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> This adds "pack_size_limit", which will contain the limit
> specified by --max-pack-size, "written_list", the actual
> list of objects written to the current pack, and "nr_written",
> the number of objects in written_list.
> ---
> builtin-pack-objects.c | 4 +++-
>
> diff --git a/builtin-pack-objects.c b/builtin-pack-objects.c
> --- a/builtin-pack-objects.c
> +++ b/builtin-pack-objects.c
> @@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ struct object_entry {
> -static uint32_t nr_objects, nr_alloc, nr_result;
> +static struct object_entry **written_list;
> +static uint32_t nr_objects, nr_alloc, nr_result, nr_written;
> @@ -64,6 +65,7 @@ static char tmpname[PATH_MAX];
> +static uint32_t pack_size_limit;
This by itself does not seem to do anything (no logic, no
command line option parsing, nothing). Why is this a separate
patch?
Remember this all started with me submitting
one monolithic patch which attracted some complaints.
After that, I broke the changes into patchsets
with 3 kinds of patches:
(a) Changes (addtitions) to data structures and declarations;
(b) Code restructuring and added forward function declarations
adding _no_ functionality;
(c) Added functionality, (almost) one function at a time.
So 1/8 is the only member of group (a).
Previously there were more changes in (a).
I'm working on another change/feature. Based on your email,
I will merge groups (a) and (b) in future patchsets.
Thanks,
--
Dana L. How danahow@xxxxxxxxx +1 650 804 5991 cell
-
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