Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > I looked over the first 7, and noticed two of the patches are flipped in > roder (I sent a separate reply in the thread, but I wanted to catch your > attention, since I guess this may be on the list for integrating today). Thanks. Let's "rebase -i" the kinks out before merging it. > I didn't see any problems in the code of the 8th one, but I didn't spend > a lot of brain power thinking about the overall design. I feel like that > was hashed out pretty well in the early discussions, though. The same here. I do not have a need for the KEY/VALUE pairs myself, but I think the design is sound and I didn't see anything wrong in the implementation.
