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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, 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 D725A1F9FD for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 20:04:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231476AbhBRUAo (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:00:44 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:38042 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231337AbhBRT6b (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:58:31 -0500 Received: (qmail 28556 invoked by uid 109); 18 Feb 2021 19:57:47 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 19:57:47 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 23927 invoked by uid 111); 18 Feb 2021 19:57:46 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:57:46 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:57:46 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Jonathan Tan Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] fsck: API improvements Message-ID: References: <87blcja2ha.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <20210217194246.25342-1-avarab@gmail.com> <87zh028ctp.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 11:12:26AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > > >> Let's get this reviewed now, but with expectation that it will be > >> rebased after the dust settles. > > > > Makes sense. Pending a review of this would you be interested in queuing > > a v2 of this that doesn't conflict with in-flight topics? > > Not really. I am not sure your recent patches are getting > sufficient review bandwidth they deserve. FWIW, I just read through v2 (without having looked at all at v1 yet!), and they all seemed like quite reasonable cleanups. I left a few small comments that might be worth a quick re-roll, but I would also be OK with the patches being picked up as-is. -Peff