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 958A61F5AF for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 21:31:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230100AbhC2Vaq (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Mar 2021 17:30:46 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:52408 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229555AbhC2VaP (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Mar 2021 17:30:15 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D64C625B; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 17:30:14 -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=a2e/HWwiBzMZpLoqXINCqHGDzhc=; b=Loctku qIsRdntr1Wg7lx4pNCahD9GDKQm5O3AnA4pGACihJM5y8qertavcffreoEiUvtEt yDfiAOhdTCTxPqBOgfkpbL3i7orkgE4FQ5xDlWUqtvb4dXs/6kT/ZrNi36M9hpUX unlBLp9sDadET3gyR/00QBSqSfVp9VbRHvNAw= 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=k2USjBquiK1LLVyM2MrEZt7ewzoxdNyO +JrzhDqleo4440Fwdc2NrmWzVqMjSzYPT68iEkqy6bLqIjTIJeCqUXK6fs9myt1V oq+W4KNYbmbxjMXPqU3olgL5PX463qypY2K3uhvsTuzmUXKWSC72Y7dn5zoVxIYT fd48sGSoEAs= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58FF1C625A; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 17:30:14 -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-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DA3D4C6259; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 17:30:13 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org, avarab@gmail.com, dstolee@microsoft.com, jonathantanmy@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] midx: implement a multi-pack reverse index References: Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 14:30:13 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 29 Mar 2021 09:05:33 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F2B1DD8E-90D5-11EB-983A-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:04:31PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote: > >> Here is another reroll of my series to implement a reverse index in >> preparation for multi-pack reachability bitmaps. The previous version >> was based on 'ds/chunked-file-api', but that topic has since been merged >> to 'master'. This series is now built directly on top of 'master'. > > I gave the whole thing another careful read. Most of what I found were > small nits, but enough that I think one more re-roll is worth it. Thanks. > The biggest question is what we want to happen next. As you note, the > concept of a midx .rev file is useless until we have the matching > .bitmap file. So we _could_ let this sit in next while the dependent > bitmap topic is reviewed, and then merge them down together. But I'm > inclined to treat this as an independent topic that can get merged to > master on its own, since the early cleanups are valuable on their own, > and the .rev parts at the end, even if dead, won't hurt anything. It was my impression as well that the early clean-ups are worth on their own.