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=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (unknown [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39CB01F9E0 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 22:16:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726261AbgD0WQo (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Apr 2020 18:16:44 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:59889 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725998AbgD0WQo (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Apr 2020 18:16:44 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB4675D4F7; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 18:16:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=6mjph8PORfGMvVG9el/hCv/kPzU=; b=Aw0BrM YKE0xthaD8tF1ln4/pyHy09HvAGtZS02Adzp2UgjET8QAk82iAAty8fT15jWKBHc DRytNbiSCNSLZFI2Vb8uK+J6Dt1eVJT0q5L6lQIg0+6mlEdMMbq+DwW4Kq6l2034 aA+x2QPIDE3nPSSCmzYlEFmyT0l23ukxut7fA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=EPold65N9YmOMCg69UzDUToe0oFaw1ir 4rhQqUqRbC2EJSBQPsyJaKgBaGiBBJWX7crRQ2eBkOba7QbHN8M92wIO100/ruy2 bOxODWTgASwHz7zIv+o+lIx+Qeb8SyK8+tmU9jtKgrhAPIJ7HLvWAxfkXVecZEcr enIXIjWgBwc= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3CE05D4F5; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 18:16:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1BAFD5D4F4; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 18:16:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Tan Cc: jrnieder@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fetch-pack: in protocol v2, in_vain only after ACK References: <20200426002802.GD877@gmail.com> <20200427172736.61159-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:16:42 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200427172736.61159-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> (Jonathan Tan's message of "Mon, 27 Apr 2020 10:27:36 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C6676050-88D4-11EA-83E9-D1361DBA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Tan writes: >> not about this patch: can these return values from process_acks be made >> into an enum with named enumerators? That would make what's happening >> in the call site more obvious. > > That sounds reasonable to me. > >> > + cp trace /tmp/x && >> >> Leftover debugging line? > > Ah, yes. If Junio can't or won't do it locally then I'll send out > another set with this changed. Well, if I am expecting the "named enumerators" patch anyway, I'd wait the fix to be done at the source ;-)