Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] pack: move pack name-related functions

2017-08-16 Thread Jonathan Tan
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 14:34:27 -0700 Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ben Peart writes: > > > On 8/9/2017 1:16 PM, Jonathan Tan wrote: > > > >> Ah, I forgot to mention this in the cover letter. I thought that one > >> header was sufficient to cover all pack-related things, so if we wanted > >> to know whi

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] pack: move pack name-related functions

2017-08-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
Ben Peart writes: > On 8/9/2017 1:16 PM, Jonathan Tan wrote: > >> Ah, I forgot to mention this in the cover letter. I thought that one >> header was sufficient to cover all pack-related things, so if we wanted >> to know which files used pack-related things, we would only need to >> search for on

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] pack: move pack name-related functions

2017-08-11 Thread Ben Peart
On 8/9/2017 1:16 PM, Jonathan Tan wrote: On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 14:00:40 +0200 Christian Couder wrote: On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Jonathan Tan wrote: On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 13:36:24 -0700 Stefan Beller wrote: There are also packed refs, so one could (like I did) think that pack.c is for g

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] pack: move pack name-related functions

2017-08-09 Thread Jonathan Tan
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 14:00:40 +0200 Christian Couder wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Jonathan Tan > wrote: > > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 13:36:24 -0700 > > Stefan Beller wrote: > >> > >> There are also packed refs, so one could (like I did) think that > >> pack.c is for generic packing of thi

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] pack: move pack name-related functions

2017-08-09 Thread Christian Couder
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Jonathan Tan wrote: > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 13:36:24 -0700 > Stefan Beller wrote: >> >> There are also packed refs, so one could (like I did) think that >> pack.c is for generic packing of things, maybe packfile.c >> would be more clear? > > Good point. I'll use pack

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] pack: move pack name-related functions

2017-08-08 Thread Jonathan Tan
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 13:36:24 -0700 Stefan Beller wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Jonathan Tan > wrote: > > Currently, sha1_file.c and cache.h contain many functions, both related > > to and unrelated to packfiles. This makes both files very large and > > causes an unclear separation of

Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] pack: move pack name-related functions

2017-08-08 Thread Stefan Beller
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Jonathan Tan wrote: > Currently, sha1_file.c and cache.h contain many functions, both related > to and unrelated to packfiles. This makes both files very large and > causes an unclear separation of concerns. > > Create a new file, pack.c, to hold all packfile-relat

[RFC PATCH 01/10] pack: move pack name-related functions

2017-08-08 Thread Jonathan Tan
Currently, sha1_file.c and cache.h contain many functions, both related to and unrelated to packfiles. This makes both files very large and causes an unclear separation of concerns. Create a new file, pack.c, to hold all packfile-related functions currently in sha1_file.c, and designate pack.h to