From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgU2NoYXJmZQ==?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] daemon: use strbuf for hostname info Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:49:49 +0100 Message-ID: <54FAD7CD.4020408@web.de> References: <54F96BF2.5000504@web.de> <20150306210627.GA24267@peff.net> <54FA4446.5050103@web.de> <20150307010832.GB8202@peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Mar 07 11:50:20 2015 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 1YUCJH-0002ov-Mc for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:50:20 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753903AbbCGKuO convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Mar 2015 05:50:14 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:54481 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751607AbbCGKuM (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Mar 2015 05:50:12 -0500 Received: from [192.168.178.27] ([79.250.190.19]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MMEzJ-1YOxVK2gV3-0086tr; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:50:07 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 In-Reply-To: <20150307010832.GB8202@peff.net> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:ASQ7PAJ92R62NMRVRw/enTGW2iFE8M0u8V+aIbFtynTwtmGLDH/ k8gZF5p9iXfQ8DD/jGPkwm+J6s4IdSzq09OMnijEdyaBqL8TySbAX+p6YOxh7VHNCJjNXWn cu/OT32wJkX0r9QhYGtxE5GnhOcQfiF48NcOiR5zd77LjhZ2Y2ju/h2ecTTRNdROlCKu7nk 6EKg8+fueXytOt01sFgLA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 07.03.2015 um 02:08 schrieb Jeff King: > On Sat, Mar 07, 2015 at 01:20:22AM +0100, Ren=C3=A9 Scharfe wrote: > >>> Not a big deal, but do we want to rename sanitize_client_strbuf to >>> sanitize_client? It only had the unwieldy name to distinguish it fr= om >>> this one. >> >> A patch would look like this. The result is shorter, but no win in >> terms of vertical space (number of lines). > > IMHO this is an improvement, though whether it is enough to merit the > code churn I dunno. So I'm in favor, but don't mind dropping it if > others disagree. I don't think the change justifies a separate patch, but we can squash=20 it in. :) Ren=C3=A9