From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.153]) (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 29EF428D83E for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2025 16:17:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.153 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761927423; cv=none; b=JoLAvR9+OkVx0BzO7VQOGvJDiiITpc6hPK2bziR7x9EgRMb6eSMwzrW5fLT5xsdMJ3OnWo0tVocBmsB62qSmm3wpXADaKu0rpZhwzLaVV1VTn76+7NQ9nchZKRzOlC/ZrwuoRfnD49uCx+/w4uV50cwjvcANS0zFu9CFDuDj8rs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761927423; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4Y5lD8KPmibR3oUD/Th4x1nO2bPaaXgashLHzUCP2pU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=JggUYsNiNfPwPbjnk/Y+4kqMY+xtzLhmQNNbBm6cSkjtNDQtmc1jtnzrbN+3k2sJlk0BxRp9saLObUrjn1C0ZZKwfWnVIFhI+c6C2Ph6tbwgrSOiWfvKcUw7lbcRyebBCXx+22fhKlcuiaEfGzbpNVqM/NmEvp6KQ6ROm9Cy8Rg= 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=Mflf9+Pi; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=niqLfrGw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.153 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="Mflf9+Pi"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="niqLfrGw" Received: from phl-compute-03.internal (phl-compute-03.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9647A0158; Fri, 31 Oct 2025 12:17:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-03.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 31 Oct 2025 12:17:00 -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=fm2; t=1761927420; x=1762013820; bh=82F0D0Biel NRi63+fEKnTWZhriswFJqTeGkcJqTGN8M=; b=Mflf9+Pi7pupx0GIXY8qt5p6uY 8LZI2aqiuFD0nWMbBL30uJyR2bAMB1nk89yK0Yo8sSP25pOj2Ap1zTM+DB8PRO2N vmasz4LCZgazjixN/urP34i+UuYuuPV2GosSs+tgNLFjhcSIjhXon1i4CB9POOOt zVzlo7PzOJ0nC+MrHeaIp9X2oSvtm56JqNd4Rk5fj6o6SWATTUouYt3y++foK5ec 6/P0n9IChNbPejkl8p1gulNjfXpzOfBn2eYTBEaoElnzLyZ71Kj53FyYZlhneRK0 6iYXVp26DJ5HKLn7iDrOfOvKXtwJOmuQ0ZTdTfDXiO5XMoR/W9zlglV0W4nA== 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=fm3; t= 1761927420; x=1762013820; bh=82F0D0BielNRi63+fEKnTWZhriswFJqTeGk cJqTGN8M=; b=niqLfrGwuhMfMNHYRtyrPJAvXZWoH0PFp1XfHrZVGaONyzz1n+s cCAqKzlacQQoN6JIltBZ3ccHrkMQISZOz5zHRaBPwfb4f1/QGCF/W+zxIZ0WaQAU XMESbgCSjFJBsZEYVeDiuAjEN2Z/eRWXLpnhDfkWxo2FQBFNcR69jSaf4+xJ91mW UdMyLQKTwdUG+BQhPGyFY55VewA3I0IQE+ja7iKW8om5mYsfJ6PvIGoruu567gG5 rPkqcbcj270fRnB9MFOb+ZxsdxeWoar4rVKig7HizurvbhHfwQXThgjvfYGv/cwf AXLIDd/1XK3zH4ROY9DI1vlGaxHDftPc6nA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggdduieelleehucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujf gurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttdertdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcu vecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepfeevteetjeehueegffelvdetieevffeufeejleeuffetiefggfeftdfhfeei geeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepgh hithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepgedpmhhouggvpehs mhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepphhssehpkhhsrdhimhdprhgtphhtthhopehkrghrth hhihhkrddukeeksehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghrrdhk vghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 31 Oct 2025 12:16:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: Karthik Nayak , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/13] object-file: introduce `struct odb_loose_source` In-Reply-To: (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Fri, 31 Oct 2025 07:11:04 +0100") References: <20251024-b4-pks-odb-loose-backend-v1-0-1a4202273c38@pks.im> <20251024-b4-pks-odb-loose-backend-v1-5-1a4202273c38@pks.im> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 09:16:58 -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: >> Hm, I see your point. I think that "loose source" flows a bit more >> natural, but I agree that the above is more accessible in code. >> >> Before I change this: does anybody else have an opinion here? > > I think for now I'll stick to the current naming. This is due to two > reasons: Ah, I should have scanned my mailbox down to the end before starting to respond. > > - As said, I think this flows more naturally in language. When talking > about this you'll say "I'm using the files source" or "I'm using the > whatever source". I do not happen to agree with this, although my preference is minor. > - It somewhat matches the naming we have in the reference backends, > where we have `struct reftable_backend` and `struct files_backend`. loose_source (without odb) may mirror calling "ref backend that uses files" files_backend, because "ref" is redundant in the context of talking about ref backends. "odb" is redundant when talking about odb sources. But we are not calling them loose_odb_source, hbase_odb_source, etc. and instead saying "odb_loose_source", which I find is a bit strange order. > That being said I don't feel very strong about this. Neither do I.