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,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 6FF8F1F9FD for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 22:38:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229743AbhBRWgt (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 17:36:49 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:61204 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229691AbhBRWgs (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 17:36:48 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A619B22C2; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 17:36:05 -0500 (EST) (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:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=oJbjqFUhy9GS tJl24oL0Nq2uX2U=; b=wp7E4KPgHUBHqCqtoTQb7af4gYrXfMNU9686aVSIbkEU L672sVE4I71z+KbmPScvtMKuWQSfR2qzS8K6vkkcBKk3P7PCGLuOCHshoOLDR3Tu 0oYDsdkAT056uD0vgx2HVaXF2qnacjfy3qXvFvcytqki2V0M9gmrOvINCx9agbw= 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:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ZAQGUm SCqLch+BvhBE1Hr9qS9XcpeTZkcQkphDpmrR/0wxfqORGuq6hP8RLmIce1Ays+F5 O2Ua7IdBqeil9FYzUI5fyinOUoL03elHXTDReeDQ0FVJRrN8yG0DWTmuxOa9hvNf 7OoBvAXHOCBr9ZYJ9O9gBSjeSQ+Eajkpt30TY= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E32EB22C1; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 17:36:05 -0500 (EST) (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 77FB2B22BE; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 17:36:04 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Jeff King Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Jonathan Tan Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] fsck: API improvements References: <87blcja2ha.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <20210217194246.25342-1-avarab@gmail.com> <87zh028ctp.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:36:03 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:57:46 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AF52FD8A-7239-11EB-B68D-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 11:12:26AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason writes: >>=20 >> >> 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 que= uing >> > a v2 of this that doesn't conflict with in-flight topics? >>=20 >> 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. Yeah, all except for a handful minor nits looked good. Thanks for writing and reviewing. Perhaps a final reroll to tie the loose ends, or is it just a matter of signing off one of them and droping a couple of other ones (which other ones)?