From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE0E1C432C3 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:41:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A502080A for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:41:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="DSwZkdAs" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726975AbfLCPl0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:41:26 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:62511 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725997AbfLCPl0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:41:26 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A1D6B3466; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:41:24 -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; s=sasl; bh=/t/xUoH72uTgg7ewxloeUfQon94=; b=DSwZkd AstS4F9zX2H1g8zrefBaIEgKaU7ARf7PMh57gLHTPDIhxJlkfMJmcny0wJBwvQjv laJ6ToCGpjAdMRCppAcApPQfrPk73i1eWwwallAsdS0vkwFOUErdqbHVvkRrwESx OFTdmN+qNnxdq56OkiPjVc+n+bmqfDOjt50Fk= 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=r7b04nmOjZTBE5+XxWg5IJpRm/OSDmBm DpI8J324cI9aru714owIdByzfUpfsxsZu9bVxNvuHBV6yMIq6NAS9U6Q4Bt3etR6 4jTeSEnOHeYU4jZEmD9e4JJqaNksC+jLo8cjpMnAGTgOnU3MExBY7lho3dBV2EMV /Sfb9MS4ecU= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EE75B3465; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:41:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53368B3464; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:41:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Denton Liu Cc: Git Mailing List , Eric Sunshine , Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 22/26] t7700: consolidate code into test_no_missing_in_packs() References: <20191202205037.GA43606@generichostname> <20191202232816.GA26892@generichostname> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 07:41:19 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20191202232816.GA26892@generichostname> (Denton Liu's message of "Mon, 2 Dec 2019 15:28:16 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5AD0208E-15E3-11EA-B473-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Denton Liu writes: >> Especially if it is near the end of the series, just a single step >> is OK. But is there anything that is glaringly wrong that needs a >> reroll? Or would it be "this is good enough, so let's have them >> cook in 'next' and graduate to 'master'---further clean-up can be >> done after all the dust settles"? I have an impression that we >> reached the latter by now. > > Perhaps the log message could use some improvement to document the > discussion we had? I don't know if that's worth a reroll, though. Aside > from that, I agree that it's ready for 'next'. Sure, let's see what you have in mind. Thanks for working on this.