Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> writes: > Karthik Nayak <karthik....@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 6:15 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: >>> 3 & 4 as a single patch may make more sense, if we were to tolerate the >>> "let's copy & paste first and then later remove the duplicate" as a way to >>> postpone touching "tag.c" side in order to first concentrate on >>> for-each-ref. >>> >>> I have not formed a firm opinion on what the right split of the series is, >>> but >>> so far (assuming that the temporary duplication is the best we can do) what >>> I am seeing in this series makes sense to me. >>> >>> Thanks. >> >> That would mean squashing 3&4, 6&7 and 10&11 also on similar lines. > > I have a slight preference for keeping the pairs not squashed. This way, > we have a clear separation "write reusable library code" / "use it". But > I'm fine with squashing if others prefer.
As I cannot firmly say that "copy & paste first and then later clean-up" is bad and we should split them in different way, I am fine with leaving them separate as they are. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
