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=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS 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 5251A1F8C6 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 01:45:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230498AbhHKBp2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Aug 2021 21:45:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50416 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230215AbhHKBp2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Aug 2021 21:45:28 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1036.google.com (mail-pj1-x1036.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1036]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9256C061765 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2021 18:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1036.google.com with SMTP id lw7-20020a17090b1807b029017881cc80b7so7130781pjb.3 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2021 18:45:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7uJYg0VcI6izMpykIfLqzYGY5DZujx4/3UQ8Gn6f8Bg=; b=gwtmUq4kq6IAyrDrSIhbwfGqjwxPYNI2Y5YIDr77blVfAZor3Fs+G9vFEe0Yhcmw49 q94f5nIKMp1Duk5TsM9Ks73n+YPks78m85ipr1WTw3dDDiPvE8PrpfO5fKV3YEl4nFiO H6VYi1uLmVOzml6vXddLIqZl1wwEIS4XS9rMSY+4cgctYrIrR5pvF85CVuR0L8HVxFPU Pyv6fC5wpo+Mo8UwN9QaZE3MtvDw4Uen0pn2cB3+pDfTQMg3La2yp3kC0A2SUIdWZF8+ s0AQEOsnMoed0nbCymjh1rgFMpP4CBLGyX9Xav+gy4jiyfowCeuSBIcmJMoJ2jpGDwF/ Tunw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7uJYg0VcI6izMpykIfLqzYGY5DZujx4/3UQ8Gn6f8Bg=; b=EQuFcT9oKQO4Umtu2TpMeXgGoUsrfpRyH9wMEab231czyhQlqauZVpnJ9EK3Q+Pmcn 8kcHeXNz9MS+GVG6x57ge2GSncpfOz65JGGZc6H1Cyzq+/x6KtLGsHGtg0GuHLp/WEu+ HG0FjaXVlGzmyC+tXoGfFyWS+Do1BOPwHp/PoY5USflOnfgq3e0i9flbKtGdHmSj3Xhf shMaOLDXHZwnbFQveovJo/RugNiAu7clb6vAe340Fo9XS9JGp00axquZ2ECSnvq8VnBR HdWfijdu4DDq4W9uJAG5M1EBpaKK5cqn6RVQdLDgJ9mF+SSaWDGNPMRspa5EIOxEWEzf aWrw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531rO3fr+jUGYHO5U1t6FDPJPPkZJdHcagDg9MCDtZ1YPBBufUbd 8q4oqAu16zhkwaTCYnrkZmM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwL1BOcP+i4BrUlGzYGfJU+adb9/jhn/N6lTQQ+M6j1nZo6F7pQmMS/HkxhQ5HyB9UUAkrLFg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:848c:b029:12c:daf3:94f1 with SMTP id c12-20020a170902848cb029012cdaf394f1mr2177706plo.50.1628646305385; Tue, 10 Aug 2021 18:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([47.246.98.155]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j23sm4529769pjn.12.2021.08.10.18.45.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 10 Aug 2021 18:45:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Teng Long To: gitster@pobox.com Cc: avarab@gmail.com, dyroneteng@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, jonathantanmy@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] packfile-uris: support for excluding commit objects Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 09:44:57 +0800 Message-Id: <20210811014457.15318-1-dyroneteng@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.31.1.449.gb2aa5456a8.dirty In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org >> Please avoid adjectives that express subjective values, like >> "sophisticated". Readers will expect a lot more sophistication than >> your code actually offers and will be disappointed ("wow, that would >> be wonderful if we can say 'exclude commits made by bots, and those >> older than 3 months'---eh, you cannot do that? where is your >> sophistication then?"). I use it("sophisticated") from "packfile-uri.txt", but i agree with you. Documentation will also remove/replace the subjective word in the next patch. >> Please avoid "should" without first describing the background for >> "why it should". It would help if you briefly describe what we >> currently have and its limitation before this first paragraph >> (i.e. your "we can already exclude only blob objects" would become >> major part of the explanation, but you'd need to present in what >> situations it would help to be able to exclude other types). Agree. Commit message will be appended with backgroud description. >> This commit is probalby doing too many things at once. For example, >> refactoring like creation of match_packfile_uri_exclusions() helper >> function out of existing code (there probably are others) can and >> should be done as separate preparatory steps before the API gets >> modified (e.g. process-object callbacks gain an e xtra parameter) in >> tree-wide way. >> >> And by slimming the primary step that introduces the new feature, >> there will be a space to also add documentation and test in the same >> step, which would help reviewers. With the current structure of the >> series, with a code dump in the first step with only a vague promiss >> of "sophistication" without documentation updates, reviewers cannot >> even tell how the "commit object" is used easily. Agree. The current commit will be splitted for more clear reponsibilities, documentation and tests ditto. Thank you.