From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5163A1F9E0 for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:22:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726411AbgD3AV6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2020 20:21:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41510 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726279AbgD3AV6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2020 20:21:58 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb4a.google.com (mail-yb1-xb4a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b4a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE52FC035494 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 17:21:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb4a.google.com with SMTP id k197so5727909ybk.21 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 17:21:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:subject:from:to :cc; bh=nOYGMjPLrgbsEsSMnpE0k0KXkWaeHG2kM9gPJzfkaSU=; b=moMEKTWvLlstgSJi+fGHpUzaUjaJH1fBcKzxnKKnFHwLKqcKfThoC7ncl6Cgpc/Du5 zngzUSGD2tVSarIWrQhOldiu3OslT519WcxFf6XhWN5qIr2nqb/BaMRYmdFaN0bUj1WZ OBNsEaHOof+BCvxT3f+u24ZW3/FBiNorWcATTP72vw3Avde/yyT8ZYJ225xF/aIbRSZX 6ToolAUhkIPZKTXzMQC5ZqA6pLoQ/tn8ZS94SbZkMAUSS+TrM/aJ4Qrt7HdP/K8q4QoP Ug0O4Nbzgvboz0d/7ZEKPl3X5U2Gb2orRYvqvrLWSGKSQJ+J+JWYZyuhtJqelhL8oMdW XADg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:from:to:cc; bh=nOYGMjPLrgbsEsSMnpE0k0KXkWaeHG2kM9gPJzfkaSU=; b=K412mtdikARH+GsosRyYFN6ANkeeNeoCtIOW2pjVM4J2y/UF5yNOOE36dIIMYNbd5c Ue/MRC9e9o3vu/pJL2UZCcfRS/9STQiGBs+p33Y3LBNQporFQ1fpBvTJ/5UovDr00g1X u405F7StyQ4DEF0VNGMF4nvv1SYITyKe0hAl6XkO5uziZ3HQNvseyUnEVyJZB9Kk32cB EOzPPXLOzaWUhR2yQ+T/a9AXv9F6PTyKQU60cOI+95L/QTWYy2b5Zg+gSPYuxRIDbdFb DxqH9XnBr/45ezDriH/qIeTBJzRw7o2oLEFAO4Yf5nCTFFDkUxuNepJQekL6BW2RZPjr 4HYg== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYqoj082ikcQKXCq9e8ayz8mnKOXpojT0L5l92+Miqpl4V2UT+m d9I+lX4OkEKZPsqsKJd9npAasXz2ze64fQ81KMIB X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJj7xsFzzzKXo3nhju2cvSSjUd4/ez8dTiHkMZ1ZpO6yXwfOT40xCZ/yj311N0L5XEN5i0kjsGYSsqwtPyzYu+1 X-Received: by 2002:a25:d901:: with SMTP id q1mr1574995ybg.30.1588206117157; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 17:21:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 17:21:54 -0700 In-Reply-To: <0b93abe072aa35ab96ba3b97118caa8ffe8e439d.1588199705.git.me@ttaylorr.com> Message-Id: <20200430002154.231855-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <0b93abe072aa35ab96ba3b97118caa8ffe8e439d.1588199705.git.me@ttaylorr.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.26.2.526.g744177e7f7-goog Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] shallow: extract a header file for shallow-related functions From: Jonathan Tan To: me@ttaylorr.com Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, jonathantanmy@google.com, jrnieder@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org First of all, I couldn't apply these patches neither on latest master (86ab15cb15 ("The fourth batch", 2020-04-28)) nor on its 2 immediate ancestors - what is the base of these patches? (Or is there something wrong with my workflow?) I'll review based on the patches themselves, but what I've seen looks good so far. > diff --git a/builtin.h b/builtin.h > index 2b25a80cde..2e701a023c 100644 > --- a/builtin.h > +++ b/builtin.h > @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ > #include "strbuf.h" > #include "cache.h" > #include "commit.h" > +#include "shallow.h" It's a pity that builtin.h has to be modified in this way, but I see that it's necessary - a few files that include builtin.h (at least git.c and builtin/bisect--helper.c) assume that they have shallow function access through this header. Once I manage to apply these patches myself, I'll verify with --color-moved that the lines moved as I expect, but otherwise patch 1 and 2 look good.