On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 4:06 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Hmm, I see the early parts of this graduated to 'next'. I'm not sure > > everything there is completely correct, though. E.g. I'm not sure of the > > reasoning in df75281e78 (ewah/bitmap: always allocate 2 more words, > > 2019-09-13). Yeah, when I prepared the series I wondered why we allocate 2 more words instead of just 1 more, but I forgot to ask that when sending it. > > I'm sorry for being so slow on giving it a more careful review. I was > > traveling for work, then playing catch-up, and am now going on vacation. > > So it might be a little while yet. > > Thanks for a status update. I do not mind moving this topic much > slower than other topics at all (if somebody is actively working on > it, I do not even mind reverting the merge and requeuing an updated > series, but I do not think that is the case here). I think the series requires at least documenting pack.allowPackReuse which is introduced in d35b73c5e9 (pack-objects: introduce pack.allowPackReuse, 2019-09-13). I was planning to send an additional patch to do that, but if you prefer I can add the documentation to the same commit that introduce the config variable and resend everything. > It would give me > much more confidence in the topic if we can collectively promise > ourselves that we'll give it a good review before we let it graduate > to 'master'. Yeah, a review from Peff could be especially insightful as the code comes from GitHub.
