From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76EECC43603 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 10:12:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 452E5217BA for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 10:12:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="DPoV7hUM" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726196AbfLGKMk (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Dec 2019 05:12:40 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-f66.google.com ([209.85.208.66]:38701 "EHLO mail-ed1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726025AbfLGKMk (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Dec 2019 05:12:40 -0500 Received: by mail-ed1-f66.google.com with SMTP id i6so6977115edr.5 for ; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 02:12:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hnLS4C3nPSYwE1/YAerTZ6hfMk8vnGY8LdXNmP8tIZk=; b=DPoV7hUMDOFsNkn4D8pXKobcbL+ckeLZxxcgQXh0rEflAwFBbi16rJ9XtDO1XT6GUd 4zPHmileblI7VC3HM9+B+bSTFqeZtQMHARa4ljXFNIwnC9Gi/KD7IDbGeD24TRvf/Enj YbNYbCO7VrPLoURZllUHZu4mGBymnD7SFdFmoNNYPJBgeD5krZ8/HeL0JDvbSZOEOBgX 4P9Zhykc4pt5F7oZthBVTowPPqijw1PvK1qN3Eimpv456NXEnAFe/XbPIut5OKxM8HmB R9DUAB5OECOlqkPtEgnOxn/JKC3ZVNcpkyItJQ6BUGAQH6QpwKDUda4VwtQkcRf8a8y7 8dtg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hnLS4C3nPSYwE1/YAerTZ6hfMk8vnGY8LdXNmP8tIZk=; b=E5ZoEUA8A/r4D8ghuntSK3htwsBui6LE2nHK7p+e2+WRtjW8uwt9PzhW+iyHiZK3Sh zaBGjqCEIjG5zamlIP5haSwJgU/6pv5qzWYiJ/USYRI0m7VxVosGLMb/uVs+AyBLS3OV T5dq9ENvv5P1NU/3zhkBPncgicFTsec2luOwCr2wX+sVsyVJZl6181Z827s+I7l0DBxv ObXPPimXhaVWm4UNs6lj0F2QjuhiOIOlxf19ar6JyYEQ9wtM+JtzH9h6+Z/b/yri3H5B cMVyEe6Qkes/0SQnopIkBv+DG+VPf5ZdLEfTri/3kKKVdLyJubtU0tEHzL3JRQ3i+DKd 9rXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX5IgGP9lluSfEEo1gldtoo0zAn1JncNiq/uojs8H+Ak7AHZzrt 0dyQ+MqZDltVAwonF2cuouPq4YH/HT6YNihw32A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxhoOnf+YGMAsj7hJZ2kNJK09KQnZV4jYOaoAeLBakiksZiBuQGlbpSqXoyg2ME25P9HbPgVCkCgeAz6iGiPZY= X-Received: by 2002:a50:f299:: with SMTP id f25mr21446283edm.280.1575713558569; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 02:12:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191115141541.11149-1-chriscool@tuxfamily.org> <20191115180319.113991-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Christian Couder Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2019 11:12:27 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] Rewrite packfile reuse code To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jeff King , Jonathan Tan , git , Christian Couder , Ramsay Jones Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 10:42 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Junio C Hamano writes: > > > Junio C Hamano writes: > > > >> Jonathan Tan writes: > >> > >>>> It could be a good idea if Peff could answer some of the comments made > >>>> by Jonathan Tan about patch 9/9. > >>>> > >>>> I have put Peff as the author of all the commits. > >>> > >>> Thanks. I think the series looks mostly good except for the questions I > >>> raised in patch 9/9, so I'll wait for Peff to respond too. > >> > >> Hmph, the round before this one has been in 'next' for quite a > >> while, so should I eject it before waiting for Peff to respond > >> before queuing this one? > > > > After rebasing these v3 patches on top of the base of the one in > > 'next', the only difference seems to be the log message of 3/9 and > > the contents of 9/9. I guess I'll mark the topic as "on hold" for > > now before doing anything, as I am officially taking a time-off most > > of this week ;-) > > So..., that week has passed---anything new? Unfortunately, no. If you want I can send an incremental change on the content of 9/9 on top of what's in next. Otherwise I can't see what I could do on this. Peff, could you tell us if you might have time to take a look at this soon?