From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E77D51F4F8 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 22:10:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S941066AbcJEWJ7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:09:59 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:62611 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S941034AbcJEWJy (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:09:54 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8B744847; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:09:52 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=i+/2pU+OiLaxPSU7HebP3VNHxZM=; b=wiytHL 4+b7kMye4ITS7B/MxgTAbPw10JHiS8nIzlzI+iSyrb4CHlb6deu01pC/D+UJz5/Y ZbSeVTxWo39mBA8xVcwW4PsAKTED7EKDrroIZXplQlsFge4mVb21j7i5ITtGYWwT UaTd/sdOi/dmf9Q5hX5RPBWRPPRRwIaDwYAsg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=k+j0EG6FCP4QZIBAbT5MIpU/nLzOOP78 jwWAT9Mkh5+D4hEm/odPLM9Zrn2cxT9U4lcANRRXrb0WL45zgcu1ATdGOVJkK1xi cpB4lFmRSTgP7R1OrG/Ru0AfPYi9v2z5h+XeWRnWNaTZtlX/FwQVYxp6EUaMJLb+ OU4DzrPRyvA= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82D4F44845; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:09:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 03AB444843; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:09:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Stefan Beller Cc: "git\@vger.kernel.org" , Brandon Williams Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] attr: Document a new possible thread safe API References: <20161004221433.23747-1-sbeller@google.com> Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 15:09:49 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Beller's message of "Wed, 5 Oct 2016 10:04:43 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 705B0FBE-8B48-11E6-AEF0-F99D12518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Stefan Beller writes: > I think so, instead of resending the documentation, maybe the header > file shows that we're on the same page, I converted everything except > attr.c to follow this header attr.h: OK. The function signature of git_check_attr() looks suspect (it does not match the "typical case" illustration in the message you are responding to), but other than that I think this matches my expectation. Thanks for taking this over.