Lars Schneider <larsxschnei...@gmail.com> writes: >> It would become a problem _if_ we want future users of this helper >> to reuse the same expect (or actual) multiple times and start from >> an unmodified one. There may be some other reason why you do not >> want the comparison to smudge these files. Please state what that >> reason is before saying "fix this". > > Understood. How about this? > > The filter log files are modified on comparison. That might be > unexpected by the caller. It would be even undesirable if the caller > wants to reuse the original log files. > > Address these issues by using temp files for modifications. This is > useful for the subsequent patch 'convert: add "status=delayed" to > filter process protocol'.
The updated one is much more understandable. Thanks. > If this is OK, then do you want me to resend the series or can you fix it > in place? In general, I am OK running "rebase -i" to polish the log message unless there are other changes to the patches planned.
