On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 3:50 PM Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@xxxxxx> wrote: > > The previous rounds got many great suggestions about patches 1 to 10, > but not as many comments on the latter patches. Christian commented that > patches 10 and 11 are too long/complex, making the overall series harder > to review. So he suggested that I eject patches 10 to 19, and send them > later in a separated part. This will hopefully make the series easier to > review and move forward. (I also hope to include a desing doc in part 2 > to make those two bigger patches more digestible.) Thanks, and yeah, sorry I suggested that privately, but should have done it on the mailing list. I actually think that patches 10 and 11 (which each one contains 400+ new lines) in the previous series should be mostly alone in a part 2, with perhaps a part 3 that would have most of the rest, so improvements and tests. It might also be possible to split at least a bit a few things in patches 10 and 11. For example I think it's ok to add new configuration in a separate patch even if it's not used yet. It can just reserve the name. That could be in part 2 then. > Changes since v4: >From a quick look at the range-diff, it looks good to me! Thanks, Christian.
