On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 5:35 AM Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I've updated these based on Eric's suggestions, hopefully they're good > to go now. Thanks Eric for you help. Thanks, I left a few comments on patch 2/2. Aside from the '>' vs. '>=' issue (over which I lost more than a few minutes cogitating), I don't think there are any blockers this time around. There are 2 or 3 things which can be done as follow-ups (indeed, even the '>' vs. '>=' could be so), but I don't think any of them are so critical that they need to be part of this series (for instance, the strbuf leak in the error path has been around for some time, and can be fixed later).
