Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > The bottom part of the errno series that I contributed has had ample > scrutiny. It's a cleanup, and all-in-all much less experimental than > the reftable work. However, because it changes a calling convention > in the ref backend API, it causes difficulty with other topics > (notably: reftable). I would be in favor of graduating the series upto > "refs: make errno output explicit for read_raw_ref_fn" early to > provide a stable basis for other patches. Very glad to see that the two of you are in agreement of the order and the approach. Let me replace the topics that have been queued on 'seen' with the latest ones from Ævar, and we can go from there. Thanks for a quick response.
