From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 05/10] pkt-line: rename s/packet_read_line/packet_read/ Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:29:31 -0500 Message-ID: <20130218102931.GP5096@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20130218091203.GB17003@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130218092252.GE5096@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130218101915.GE7049@elie.Belkin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Shawn O. Pearce" To: Jonathan Nieder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 18 11:30:00 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U7Nyx-0002an-Q2 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 11:30:00 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752354Ab3BRK3e (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:29:34 -0500 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:51785 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752187Ab3BRK3d (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:29:33 -0500 Received: (qmail 18473 invoked by uid 107); 18 Feb 2013 10:31:04 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:31:04 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 05:29:31 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130218101915.GE7049@elie.Belkin> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 02:19:15AM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Jeff King wrote: > > > Originally packets were used just for the line-oriented ref > > advertisement and negotiation. These days, we also stuff > > packfiles and sidebands into them, and they do not > > necessarily represent a line. Drop the "_line" suffix, as it > > is not informative and makes the function names quite long > > (especially as we add "_gently" and other variants). > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King > > --- > > Again, this is a taste issue. Can be optional. > > In combination with patch 3, this changes the meaning of packet_read() > without changing its signature, which could make other patches > cherry-picked on top change behavior in unpredictable ways. :( > > So I'd be all for this if the signature changes (for example to put > the fd at the end or something), but not so if not. True. Though packet_read has only existed since last June, only had one callsite (which would now conflict, since I'm touching it in this series), and has no new calls in origin..origin/pu. So it's relatively low risk for such a problem. I don't know how careful we want to be. -Peff