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=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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 3D8B420A40 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:57:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751878AbdKVQ5U (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Nov 2017 11:57:20 -0500 Received: from mail-qk0-f170.google.com ([209.85.220.170]:37416 "EHLO mail-qk0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751686AbdKVQ5T (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Nov 2017 11:57:19 -0500 Received: by mail-qk0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 136so17602401qkd.4 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 08:57:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zU8SJ+n55m3FjO1wAu/0JMkJhOyxMo0S9V/ApX83GDc=; b=u+ymB9tKKr5rEKqu3+4X/czhVItBI6LWx1/q3/i//plJITl+nfBBhn1H7Q/76NEJyK PjUccNH7mCSnt8liWqk3oB1wErtmnsfVLvWbkI+WNB818ePKq5ydUqWpvUskrwuBYLAi 4kJdCUqaRGNZcYAbjzxt6fGuSDrV9G5AYfYpcSDis0FZw63/qRwz54dXNB3h/Ywu+30T R0H0R5mZLtBHM6fbk6L9Wv7Z9M2LqVZiay+/wB+v8aCmRDitAs6jT7hKaxmfAHofOP0T aR7Luu4M7KBkKdJ+Ixmq/DwiBhEyKM/ve1Cqi0qkmm3SeI785KAQiRzPxsTOL04AXIPz 3MSw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zU8SJ+n55m3FjO1wAu/0JMkJhOyxMo0S9V/ApX83GDc=; b=FpK0IWgKrGmnyB9uy9IYWQIdR3jDSbmuys5zliWKZAvvBSCqDyaqP9WHQsOpHHDEgM MOwsm1X3iA/UrKdU2jztGQxLq3v0x1eIE6oingGDWkzIuixs0VX5Hx13HNVsl2v6FENN /Drm1TJ5jRU0MeVYR7mPi7DH72MQEhmur3NsuNfTX8zzcbu9Z52+DORnX/2u7PAp/Z2/ m+xfPJJ5JPJgdcHXQryIZUZzGf8Yl/wz46MNW2Gvebpy7uegC4scNSAQfFb6s9Byi8jh coBw1Z9A6cugrSfmGxZkA0wE2hdlpJcIdZIeVkZL/ofN9Jv5e0oSoXYhybhTRrhOc7PB z8nQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4AtInQl7TsLORpTR8gMB2DzcdSkwSfVHUnbeoxXfuBg7R8suiP rM7Mrz2xrDuOjrFzPedbmFUEZd+WkP3aYOs6CJttKw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbOGzzLqzKrskq4tasJnSRlN8DeGhzBo5EDmi9j/gapLGbAHgjoPepPZrvKq/rSHDB11+JGUmGtVJFW3J58Zfg= X-Received: by 10.55.107.65 with SMTP id g62mr9336853qkc.295.1511369838398; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 08:57:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.85.179 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 08:57:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20171112212854.791179-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> From: Stefan Beller Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 08:57:17 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Hash abstraction To: Junio C Hamano Cc: "brian m. carlson" , git , Jonathan Nieder , Brandon Williams , Eric Sunshine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:50 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> "brian m. carlson" writes: >> >>> This is a series proposing a basic abstraction for hash functions. >>> >>> The full description of the series can be found here: >>> https://public-inbox.org/git/20171028181239.59458-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net/ >>> >>> At the bottom of this message is the output of git tbdiff between v2 and >>> v3. >>> >>> Changes from v2: >>> * Remove inline. >>> * Add dummy functions that call die for unknown hash implementation. >>> * Move structure definitions to hash.h and include git-compat-util.h in >>> hash.h. >>> * Rename current_hash to the_hash_algo. >>> * Use repo_set_hash_algo everywhere we set the hash algorithm for a >>> struct repository. >> >> Change for all of the above in this series looked sensible to me. >> Thank, will queue. > > So... is everybody happy enough with this version that nobody minds > more codebase to be adjusted on the infrastructure this series lays > out? I think this is ready for 'next', but just in case I missed > some discussions... yeah I was happy at the time of review; sorry for not saying so.