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-Status: No, score=-3.7 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,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 6CC921F9FC for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 11:15:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230039AbhCTLOF (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Mar 2021 07:14:05 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39664 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230354AbhCTLNr (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Mar 2021 07:13:47 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x12e.google.com (mail-lf1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8DE4C06178A for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 04:13:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id q29so13873075lfb.4 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 04:13:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:user-agent:in-reply-to:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aYckyjfeIHGLNZC2C9qy4WogFBLdJvm8e+1XMYW8Vn4=; b=nDFEUYP7KX6rtou58LFE76pub+XXtVJjCuBe2AKJHQGbCAopE8aJs2vJAwURSfWarQ Wtlz6VV5njUalu4ipCTU6kbhwL37jTkDfx47cm0k8B19SxVrnPFm318xlJZywfxbdo9n YX0O3gCst/ODZkJqL1pHBdKmYDSJ1zQKeL+O+7Q6cQAqMEYQ12l6c6wVQrSF2I3ndbXY N98CqBEZOjoqQCdKPahy+zdWzm2G7rZX0F/pbNbB2OGH7VTk78q2ue8QY5mkV8spSNle Lxuoh/lJ1zqffBeQDOOWQSnSzQzlqo+s9WNt8FuDy6inob6/gVYyslYF6oNCNec2ViMo 9QMg== 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:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aYckyjfeIHGLNZC2C9qy4WogFBLdJvm8e+1XMYW8Vn4=; b=Wi2/cUYcKMeQp7CRoQva+YeVevgbbZMqVRZZXPRZpT5UKxiHIBCO/i1fttEN6Ccx8s DAmYM8NGuNsW0RPfcC0apYqkwAk1R/mfi7gEaaczVEhe7se43u9hPUEGIoxWyhPOEztx 0h/v7ULjuAQPKkrKDnf992NvX8MnoU2/2NUhJTjuzNT+inm8cfU5lKYNG1/ts3FSmbOZ pQ3YB9UnxzHuCSsRo/YA67kr1ArXouTFLJ6NoD46cl++xEEd1V2iPLOD7mtpIHUiTlQ9 z3VbTLK/3bnibcGa2IBRVjcWrymghyGTU9xB290cTA+CoP9CHez7AdyDWwjsXJm6nSwp 1wOw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532EUfQXXFwwY00O/FwAIvuyZFHgRS4XHuuPhFUhDyfgOBSU6UZo GlLwHceyCb6h7p0rgk69juhz+n8miTo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxeaBilHBVsh47kPfNoJHgFk/f+8cKfF494OMGsCIuTDaQqk8AfGaSNya0/G/Zwwo5/ZOJnHQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:53d7:: with SMTP id p23mr8933794ejo.140.1616231819124; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 02:16:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from evledraar (77-60-191-25.biz.kpn.net. [77.60.191.25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 90sm5857196edf.31.2021.03.20.02.16.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 20 Mar 2021 02:16:58 -0700 (PDT) From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Jeff King , Jonathan Tan Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/22] fsck.h: update FSCK_OPTIONS_* for object_name References: <20210306110439.27694-1-avarab@gmail.com> <20210316161738.30254-2-avarab@gmail.com> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux bullseye/sid; Emacs 27.1; mu4e 1.4.15 In-reply-to: Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 10:16:57 +0100 Message-ID: <87czvuyyk6.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 19 2021, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi =C3=86var, > > just a general note: this patch, which is the first of v4, is marked as > replying to the cover letter of v3. That feels quite odd. If you use > threading, why not let it reply to the cover letter of the same patch > series iteration? > > In other words, would you mind using the `--thread=3Dshallow` option in t= he > future, for better structuring on the mailing list? Not at all, I've set it in my config now. I've just been using the default configuration of format-patch --in-reply-to --cover-letter && send-email *.patch all this time. Looking around at other patch submissions (aside from GGG) this seems to be the norm though, but isn't documented in SubmittingPatches etc. AFAICT. So I wonder if I'm using some different process from the norm, or if most everyone else is just looking carefully at Message-ID/In-Reply-To norms before sending... > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021, =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason wrote: > >> Add the object_name member to the initialization macro. This was >> omitted in 7b35efd734e (fsck_walk(): optionally name objects on the >> go, 2016-07-17) when the field was added. >> >> Signed-off-by: =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason >> --- >> fsck.h | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fsck.h b/fsck.h >> index 733378f126..2274843ba0 100644 >> --- a/fsck.h >> +++ b/fsck.h >> @@ -43,8 +43,8 @@ struct fsck_options { >> kh_oid_map_t *object_names; >> }; >> >> -#define FSCK_OPTIONS_DEFAULT { NULL, fsck_error_function, 0, NULL, OIDS= ET_INIT } >> -#define FSCK_OPTIONS_STRICT { NULL, fsck_error_function, 1, NULL, OIDSE= T_INIT } >> +#define FSCK_OPTIONS_DEFAULT { NULL, fsck_error_function, 0, NULL, OIDS= ET_INIT, NULL } >> +#define FSCK_OPTIONS_STRICT { NULL, fsck_error_function, 1, NULL, OIDSE= T_INIT, NULL } >> >> /* descend in all linked child objects >> * the return value is: >> -- >> 2.31.0.260.g719c683c1d >> >>