On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 04:22:14PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 03:22:40PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > Since this hit 'next', Coverity complained about a small leak. Fixed by > > the patch below. > > The patch below looks good and makes sense to me. That warning is > awfully long, though ;-). > > In any event, I expect that 'next' will be rewound before this topic > graduates, since it is meaty and we are in the middle of the -rc phase. > > ...and we also have my series on top [1], so it may be worthwhile for > you, Jonathan, and I to figure out how to combine our efforts here. I > think that this could likely get squashed in to Jonathan's topic > if/after it gets ejected from 'next'. We can take my patches together in > the same series, separately in a different one, or discard them > altogether. > > If we do decide to pursue the approach in [1], I think combining > everything together into one big series makes the most sense for ease of > merging. Yeah, I am just coming back from vacation and didn't follow all of the discussion on this topic carefully. The few patches I sent today were just enough to get the test suite passing again (the send-email fixes) and silence any new Coverity warnings. ;) If it does get re-rolled, I would be quite happy if my fix here just gets squashed into the appropriate commit. -Peff
