On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 09:05:33AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:04:31PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:
>
> > Here is another reroll of my series to implement a reverse index in
> > preparation for multi-pack reachability bitmaps. The previous version
> > was based on 'ds/chunked-file-api', but that topic has since been merged
> > to 'master'. This series is now built directly on top of 'master'.
>
> I gave the whole thing another careful read. Most of what I found were
> small nits, but enough that I think one more re-roll is worth it.
Thanks. I agree that another re-roll is worth it. I have one prepared
locally, and I just had one outstanding question in:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/YGI6ySogGoYZi66A@nand.local/
that I'll wait on your reply to before sending a reroll.
> The biggest question is what we want to happen next. As you note, the
> concept of a midx .rev file is useless until we have the matching
> .bitmap file. So we _could_ let this sit in next while the dependent
> bitmap topic is reviewed, and then merge them down together. But I'm
> inclined to treat this as an independent topic that can get merged to
> master on its own, since the early cleanups are valuable on their own,
> and the .rev parts at the end, even if dead, won't hurt anything.
That matches what I was hoping for. I think the clean-ups are worth it
on their own, but I also think it's a good idea to take the whole
series, since it means there's one less long-running branch in flight
while we review the MIDX bitmaps topic.
(FWIW, I can also see an argument in the other direction along the lines
of "we may discover something later on that requires us to change the
way multi-pack .rev files work". I think that such an outcome is fairly
unlikely, but worth considering anyway).
Thanks,
Taylor
