Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2017, #07; Mon, 30)

[Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>]

On Wed, 01 Nov 2017 10:21:20 +0900
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

> Jeff Hostetler <Jeff.Hostetler@microsoft.com> writes:
> 
> >> Yes, that, together with the expectation that I will hear from both you and JTan 
> >> once the result of combined effort becomes ready to replace this placeholder, 
> >> matches my assumption.
> >> 
> >> Is that happening now?
> >
> > Yes, I'm merging our them now and hope to have a version to
> > send to Jonathan and/or the list sometime this week.
> 
> Thanks.

Junio, would you prefer that the combined effort be in one single patch
series or separated out into 3? The way I see it, there are two
independent patch series - this one (object filter support in rev-list
and pack-objects) and my one (repo extension for partial clone, fsck,
and gc), and one patch series that depends on these two.

I prefer to have smaller patch series as a patch author (for example,
less need to update later patches due to a design or API issue caught in
review), as a reviewer (for example, less things to keep in mind as I
review things patch by patch), and as an experimenter (assuming that
smaller patch series go through the "next" -> "master" process faster,
this means fewer locally-applied patches to juggle when testing out a
new feature, as Jonathan Nieder said [1]).

I understand if you prefer each patch set to have at least one useful
self-contained feature (or bug fix), though. (Having said that, I think
that this patch set, at least - object filter support in rev-list and
pack-objects - is useful enough on its own, but I understand if it
doesn't reach the bar.)

[1] https://public-inbox.org/git/20171030222726.g26nryjxktyj27sd@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com/