On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 04:56:41PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > So, yes I can agree that this does not introduce any new bug, it is > a mysterious no-op, and why we want to pass different values in "start" > in future steps in order to achieve what is not explained and leaves > the readers frustrated. Re-reading this patch again with your review in mind, I agree that the split is poorly placed. I modified this patch to just extract the core routine behind a helper function and avoided adding the "start" parameter here. Thanks, Taylor
