On 02/23, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Brandon Williams <bmw...@google.com> wrote:
> > On 02/20, Stefan Beller wrote:
> >> Add a repository argument to allow sha1_file_name callers to be more
> >> specific about which repository to handle. This is a small mechanical
> >> change; it doesn't change the implementation to handle repositories
> >> other than the_repository yet.
> >>
> >> As with the previous commits, use a macro to catch callers passing a
> >> repository other than the_repository at compile time.
> >>
> >> While at it, move the declaration to object-store.h, where it should
> >> be easier to find.
> >
> > Seems like we may want to make a sha1-file.h or an oid-file.h or
> > something like that at some point as that seems like a better place for
> > the function than in the object-store.h file?
> 
> It depends what our long term goal is.
> Do we want header and source file name to match for each function?
> Or do we want a coarser set of headers, such that we have a broad
> object-store.h, but that is implemented in sha1_file.c, packfile.c
> for the parts of the raw_objectstore and other .c files for the higher
> levels of the object store?
> 
> For now I'd just keep it in object-store.h as moving out just a couple
> functions seems less consistent?

Fair enough :)

-- 
Brandon Williams

Reply via email to