"Dana How" <danahow@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 5/8/07, Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Dana How <danahow@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> ... >> > This applies on top of the git-repack --max-pack-size patchset. > >> Hmph, that makes the --max-pack-size patchset take this more >> trivial and straightforward improvements hostage. In general, >> I'd prefer more elaborate ones based on less questionable >> series. > > The max-pack-size and pack.compression patches touch the same lines. > I thought my options were: > * Submit independently and make you merge; or > * Make one precede the other. > Since max-pack-size has been out there since April 4 and > the first acceptable version was May 1 (suggested by 0 comments), > I didn't realize it was a "questionable series". No, what I meant was that it is much "more elaborate" series than this custom compression which is much "less questionable". I think this custom compression is 1.5.2 material. I have not studied the code for the max-pack-size enough to be confident to put it in 1.5.2, at least not yet, and was planning to park the latter in 'next' until 1.5.2 final. - 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
