On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 02:50:52AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 02:40:28AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > * tb/pair-chunk-expect-size (2023-10-14) 8 commits > > - midx: read `OOFF` chunk with `pair_chunk_expect()` > > - midx: read `OIDL` chunk with `pair_chunk_expect()` > > - midx: read `OIDF` chunk with `pair_chunk_expect()` > > - commit-graph: read `BIDX` chunk with `pair_chunk_expect()` > > - commit-graph: read `GDAT` chunk with `pair_chunk_expect()` > > - commit-graph: read `CDAT` chunk with `pair_chunk_expect()` > > - commit-graph: read `OIDF` chunk with `pair_chunk_expect()` > > - chunk-format: introduce `pair_chunk_expect()` helper > > > > Code clean-up for jk/chunk-bounds topic. > > > > Comments? > > source: <45cac29403e63483951f7766c6da3c022c68d9f0.1697225110.git.me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > source: <cover.1697225110.git.me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sorry it took me a while to circle back to this topic. I posted a > competing series just now in: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20231109070310.GA2697602@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > that I think should take precedence (and would require some reworking of > Taylor's patches, so you'd just eject them in the meantime). ACK: that sounds like a good plan to me. Thanks for picking this back up, Peff! Thanks, Taylor
