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=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, 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 DF86E20899 for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2017 21:04:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752196AbdHHVEl (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:04:41 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:50992 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752145AbdHHVEl (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:04:41 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB8D966CC; Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:04:40 -0400 (EDT) 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=Uluwt765iIq0AMoXHo9Ux6cLvb0=; b=Aip8Hp 7GKNrrNQ9eUPgy4Ojt5gV6AvarEEPFQnoL4U+ffy5s/3ddsqoWeNHUSYsXbPzunw dRF83DeVbN3JwmCwlR5Mpo91ElpbYbbZ2N6lU2dsr+eVlT69wqr6p0tz+3hB2RsR 4MOR+j5dElDlYv4hcAf0Anqe9D0TrKIkmF8/o= 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=qer8poQNLUqruwqIsBakJia1BidBFp1z yhaDQ8T228mPpRJppMFgjDitFPNrhRlEohP70DCmOh5G8hkBw6NfD/synY0GpSYe 7oXrGCaIE6r8TQEgpCZaRzIkfITQQxyjleGPzq8xiZtsNtNhfzaylNnXUu3fjtpc zDbjI5mTvxM= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75820966CB; Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:04:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C437E966CA; Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:04:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Tan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] An attempt to move packfile funcs to its own file References: <20170808134335.2834cb3d@twelve2.svl.corp.google.com> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2017 14:04:38 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20170808134335.2834cb3d@twelve2.svl.corp.google.com> (Jonathan Tan's message of "Tue, 8 Aug 2017 13:43:35 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 315036A6-7C7D-11E7-8BD1-9D2B0D78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Tan writes: > What do you mean by "keep the exposed surface area small enough"? If you > mean the total number of exposed functions in sha1_file and pack (once > everything is done), I think it will be almost the same as that > currently in sha1_file. > ... > During this patch set, there might be some functions that need to be > temporarily made global, but those are reverted to static in the end. That is exactly what I meant. > As stated above, I don't think so, but I'll make a list of the functions > needing to be made global. Good. Thanks.