On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 10:55:43AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Part three doesn't exist yet, but is straightforward to do on top. None > > of the design decisions made in this series inhibit my goals for part > > three. > > Nice to always see the bigger picture to come to understand where > the current series fits, but the above is a bit peculiar thing to > say. Of course there should be no design decision the currently > posted series makes that would block your future work---otherwise > you would not be posting it.i Yeah. What I was trying to say was that part two actually exists, and works in practice rather than just thinking that it would work without having actually demonstrated anything ;-). > The real question is rather the future and yet to be written work is > still feasible after the design decisions the current series made are > found to be broken and need to be revised (if it happens---but we do > not know until we see reviews). Indeed. I'll make sure that before I push out a new round that the rebased part two still works as I expect it to. Certainly all of this could be avoided by combining the two together, but I think the result is just too large to review. Thanks, Taylor
