From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-b8-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b8-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.151]) (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 B531E334680 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 17:11:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.151 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760634684; cv=none; b=HxCE3MtdxTjYTdIC/bZEtLjPAXvRKVMaHd1wGfZnlWfuwdz05G0G7kOzwS89yCWCgh7hMlOSm4b81xp9N3QmoxmuoGr6me+J9g2J41DcPFjs06yNToAotolnE97yy8T1zsitDdL0fBHNznoRFqnZD2GXjRwmy5T26uc4wOGrHPo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760634684; c=relaxed/simple; bh=v9JtNGoMuNkqlJIxvdXeORlsKZQviHkB8QlFc05LS5A=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dbjglTvWYtcTe6YbU7fxLnCZoJm6nCFkS+4bZmG/fwsjYa7LeFpQItuVvkMERyhIanil+3QFwUWAfXe7cR7MeCEMdPx8lpbwjc75IjqdDawtGAIYnD3jmsqSF+pVVXYowtYRdgmrZbZR3K3b0fFAV271uYZtP1V0m73mM6jcYE4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=Kyl0889W; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=G+67lszz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.151 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="Kyl0889W"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="G+67lszz" Received: from phl-compute-10.internal (phl-compute-10.internal [10.202.2.50]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B281D1D0005C; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 13:11:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-10.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 16 Oct 2025 13:11:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1760634681; x=1760721081; bh=eDtstChA2l cW/AIoij4rxyA8Tu5nhgdATVxFdZEQ6QQ=; b=Kyl0889WBcGTCAqy/JosCa0ENV Z7iyTD9j5MD46RktiF0/9WcFYdcqv+xvDLCUuVgt3z9ehZ7145WwhJB0cp4Beoc8 CiAgCZbCQW3Hjo6nEgdbPQeYJ65HRPSX1K64uuEyjG+2Fd8wBtTD2lAOhsU4tWOe WRDS1Hi7YC9XMFYJlP9MBjKa3t6o6yzVzlRdcsHO/Gl6ppq6OPwJTYSrFzUdmbUE esAqqaPkDe0XEob9M4LjQdE/Coi44zZpX0Do+bypG4P4Fc3TU3RUF9gdavm6onwX yKYBHHIS74PCxnnLzt3VMKymEbD+VxJzGd5uaxJQ+YtqdCnIXtcU0DKqSwuQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1760634681; x=1760721081; bh=eDtstChA2lcW/AIoij4rxyA8Tu5nhgdATVx FdZEQ6QQ=; b=G+67lszzweug3Oe218+E1rsEJamiI8NDMC8bAYxNDOCzUvG8OYt CwUzuU1l3IcKZTaNVMYsMaRIGwweLTv1P/1hCLV6GrXfw2kxBsChTgE0xLgYu6tn xjfXhbFX7Guf9mPQGKnhHAfSVIFeq0UOMl7kivTvPsYeXzWz9WNvP372psy/5VvS dboC7xd6yTBTubpHCDbMCyQvr2qtzwLIjGo0qopqND3/OFSvg4A76sTVzxDd3q6o UjRsTlygDkG2ulqqYgJm+tjopUByy4i6wqL05d14ZByiMggn6URdwrCw4sdFBet6 b/o0JNGYveV2Eucqc4cW9FoYJ3QULAaohEA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggdduvdeikeeiucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujf gurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttdertdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcu vecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepfeevteetjeehueegffelvdetieevffeufeejleeuffetiefggfeftdfhfeei geeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepgh hithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepjedpmhhouggvpehs mhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepphhssehpkhhsrdhimhdprhgtphhtthhopehmvgesth htrgihlhhorhhrrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdr ohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehpvghffhesphgvfhhfrdhnvghtpdhrtghpthhtohepnhgvfi hrvghnsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepjhhlthhosghlvghrsehgmhgrihhl rdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 13:11:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Elijah Newren , Justin Tobler Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/49] repack: prepare for incremental MIDX-based repacking In-Reply-To: (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Thu, 16 Oct 2025 12:31:43 +0200") References: Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 10:11:19 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Patrick Steinhardt writes: >> A range-diff is included below for convenience, but the changes since >> v1 are generally limited to the following: >> >> * Wording tweaks and a couple of minor typo fixes. >> >> * Dropping explicit casts out of 'void *'. >> >> * Clarification in commit "builtin/repack.c: introduce `struct >> write_pack_opts`" that additional cleanup follows in the upcoming >> patches. >> >> * Marking parts of the new API as const where possible. >> >> * Using 'bool' as the return type and simplifying the implementation >> of `write_pack_opts_is_local()`. >> >> * Avoid shadowing "struct write_pack_opts opts" in `cmd_repack()`. >> >> Outside of that, the series is unchanged, and I am hopeful that this >> round looks good to reviewers so that we can move on to the more >> interesting parts of incremental MIDX/bitmap repacking ;-). > > I didn't quite feel like reviewing all of these patches again, so I only > had a look at the range-diff. The changes in there all look good to me > and address my feedback. > > So I feel like all of this is in a reasonably good shape and a > definitive improvement for our code base. Thanks! ;-) Thanks for a vote of confidence. With what I saw in v1 round, I agree these are in good shape. Thanks.