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=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID 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 57DC61FD99 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 18:17:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933593AbcHJSRf (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:17:35 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53]:38412 "EHLO mail-wm0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933197AbcHJSRd convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:17:33 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f53.google.com with SMTP id o80so121559266wme.1 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 11:17:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=+5YKQkeg0GcYo/l0FHavZDzw+2pVrytln6hKM9mXZkw=; b=m37zTpT3VgUjC0eVJ9i7pBdY89NSwN2bxOuOEtVOD/a+xMkTQQFtFBPdxaQ+fZ+eoC Q/QQCgNgXhh9W5gq9cGBu7+J3ibQQA2EcQX4KnYN0gnWytfIBYVMM73aWFvfX1o4hPTB TLKGy0SAEKZ2x1IQUN5xVzS3iSi/vV2xFMp5C+PTHpuDmu0CypIevzR11TjM1epasIpP 94mfD1SJFUWxWAn2ZgF5OPK4aGy+5cgF52B7Qv8upY3XA72p+/dD6EnvzbDHPFwTVnjh xYvhShaRvDPwgfFCj8Ek5V16ZGdbHi7cigQygbd9Y2AtLHCw0JS53N9cnKun0yZv2cJR d9JA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=+5YKQkeg0GcYo/l0FHavZDzw+2pVrytln6hKM9mXZkw=; b=TNmXVpWGK2A6ryJzerwG2iSaBL9lLsJNq6yOH2tzAOiuAEZ4fYZmaj87hfKi8bYYg7 SUCCAphTIV+cXx85wcvNbMo5JnN8ySaUk7T4LNiSkXRkj/BMtkPHyxoBHYj92aQ9V6M7 CBc/U3xvsjDC0Knl0vjokRvj8rm9iyalhpm1qHjzNJ2UrqEsBqIKIgSf98FFX09Hznp4 lCZIs6ZP/RhMeZLcyUbnB7wcIxeC4s5TqhLTCZrbToa8Agd8IoZFUw/6GU0BWg0C+IG3 OuMCQoU1Ap5Z8zsKu8jNe8uiKk2IVc412tLbCVeal1GN8iUYa3i5ZnVefwxbw5zIf0j+ dnIA== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouset3sogwqu4gsspsXFfIuZdcAU/po6ej1mu25qS9cyB/rPtGcUrWoJvjkPYyeHTg== X-Received: by 10.194.41.194 with SMTP id h2mr6077890wjl.2.1470851389364; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:49:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slxbook4.ads.autodesk.com ([62.159.156.210]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b123sm9444716wmg.17.2016.08.10.10.49.48 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:49:48 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/15] pkt-line: add packet_write_gently() From: Lars Schneider In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 19:49:48 +0200 Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org, jnareb@gmail.com, mlbright@gmail.com, e@80x24.org, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de, ben@wijen.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Message-Id: <13CB2673-7C7D-4982-9725-27D4091AAD84@gmail.com> References: <20160803164225.46355-1-larsxschneider@gmail.com/> <20160810130411.12419-1-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <20160810130411.12419-5-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <20160810132814.gqnipsdwyzjmuqjy@sigill.intra.peff.net> <434CB5D7-3FC0-4398-9028-135701121E55@gmail.com> <20160810134003.q6mzgkcrwmkxv5fw@sigill.intra.peff.net> To: Junio C Hamano X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org > On 10 Aug 2016, at 19:17, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Jeff King writes: > >> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 03:36:45PM +0200, Lars Schneider wrote: >> >>>> So now we have packet_write() and packet_write_gently(), but they differ >>>> in more than just whether they are gentle. That seems like a weird >>>> interface. >>>> >>>> Should we either be picking a new name (e.g., packet_write_mem() or >>>> something), or migrating packet_write() to packet_write_fmt()? >>> >>> Done in "[PATCH v5 08/15] pkt-line: rename packet_write() to packet_write_fmt()" >> >> Ah, OK. Generally I'd suggest to reorder things so that each patch looks >> like a step forward (and so the early patches become preparatory steps, >> and the justification in them is something like "we're going to add more >> write functions, so let's give this a more descriptive name"). > > I am guilty for saying "packet_write() should have been similar to > write(2)". We may want to have a time-period during which there is > no "packet_write()" in the codebase, before we get to that stage. > I.e. rename it to packet_write_fmt() to vacate the name and add > packet_write_mem(), and then later rename packet_write_mem() to its > final name packet_write(), or something like that. The two-step > process would reduce the chance of misconversion. OK. Does this mean I can leave the "packet_write()" to "packet_write_fmt()" rename as is in this series? Thanks, Lars