From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] commit-queue: LIFO or priority queue of commits Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:59:07 -0400 Message-ID: <20130610185907.GD2084@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1370581872-31580-1-git-send-email-gitster@pobox.com> <1370820277-30158-1-git-send-email-gitster@pobox.com> <1370820277-30158-3-git-send-email-gitster@pobox.com> <20130610052500.GD3621@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vwqq2l9cz.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20130610181557.GA2084@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7v1u89iyla.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Elliott Cable To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 10 20:59:18 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Um7JE-0004F4-BJ for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 20:59:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754200Ab3FJS7M (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:59:12 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:47333 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754129Ab3FJS7L (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:59:11 -0400 Received: (qmail 25841 invoked by uid 102); 10 Jun 2013 19:00:02 -0000 Received: from c-71-62-74-146.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.62.74.146) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:00:02 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:59:07 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7v1u89iyla.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:56:33AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > or similar. I didn't change the name, either. It may be silly to call it > > "commit_queue" still since it is now more general. I simply called mine > > "queue" (I wanted "pqueue", but that conflicted with globals defined by > > OpenSSL; yours is a more general queue anyway, so maybe that is a good > > name). > > I agree that it makes sense not to call it either commit-queue or > pqueue. While at it, the filenames should probably be moved as > well, no? Yeah, definitely. I left all of that as an exercise for you, since the name change will involve a lot of fallout in the other patches. -Peff