From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-181.mta1.migadu.com (out-181.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 435C23546F5 for ; Fri, 12 Jun 2026 08:20:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.181 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781252412; cv=none; b=cX8MOhgzeJ4v7oc6ckvyuYD/tYyC485oxLyzqAf0kbRUQj3/SOQG/nF1OaE/+xXuRxNKYx3N/FRpfmqwyzsxRhnUkl01EVRTGmKgfcOcoNaZTIYH0zGx7Ukg2hh2E3Qh56CiI4gZdKhsq64/2uSA5sS0+qI4nrwiqW7WiSIHshQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781252412; c=relaxed/simple; bh=V3IKcD7gB5c4b99/R8ITkw6g8TgrNLKfVFhB1wZr834=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ViHuYXzPbgyqOtw+fOvoRNcT8tbbbwlBCAHZZWOTw2G9NVg22jQpeOjZpBegfACbWaS2g/hi8oyxQd73IrlZgBEi5TCAYpzl4WY0mL3Kw0hFE2H45zOmCwFVQhBQYedEKYxEwmKHEqhCnPFGUKCJ9WgCmdIKt6INlod80Hhu/gI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=iotcl.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=iotcl.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=iotcl.com header.i=@iotcl.com header.b=47P4z4Fs; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.181 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=iotcl.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=iotcl.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=iotcl.com header.i=@iotcl.com header.b="47P4z4Fs" X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iotcl.com; s=key1; t=1781252408; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=yZCWsiuDFCbpcY0Bw+bAjFzslZsG1DDfuhAj0N/etf8=; b=47P4z4FsA9abfcUN6lGEwggDpphoaFehFluCmddGrqaI74vwjE/7hYL7W9xtBhGx1YZi4b kh1tWPrKFJ/Rzh2uXCkcz36mIxuuVU0eTWAsj3VKunYCWGaC1nlNs7Zr+C/wpYVIAW+7vQ RITwtPe/EIQKpo5WvhBG5/0OeMGAigM= From: Toon Claes To: Justin Tobler Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] replay: refactor enum replay_mode into a bool In-Reply-To: References: <20260610-toon-git-replay-drop-merges-v2-0-5714a71c6d83@iotcl.com> <20260610-toon-git-replay-drop-merges-v2-1-5714a71c6d83@iotcl.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2026 10:19:40 +0200 Message-ID: <87h5n8yxur.fsf@emacs.iotcl.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Justin Tobler writes: > Naive question: Do we expect there to only be two replay modes in the > forseeable future? I suppose if other modes were added in the future > this change would essentially be reverted. The enum was mainly used to determine "direction": PICK to apply commits forward, and REVERT to apply them in opposite order. But it's a bit twofold, because REVERT also applies the inverse change. At the moment --onto and --advance use PICK and --revert uses REVERT. There could be added more options in the future, but I don't expect any of them to add a new mode. And if there is ever a new mode needed, I think it's better to re-add the enum then, or maybe a second bool makes sense then, who knows... -- Cheers, Toon