On 11/04/2015 06:43 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > >> From: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> >> >> QAPISchemaObjectTypeVariants.check() parameter members is no >> longer used, drop it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> >> Message-Id: <1446559499-26984-3-git-send-email-arm...@redhat.com> >> [Variant.check(seen) is used after all, so reword and reduce scope >> of this patch; rearrange later in the series] > > Don't you need to update the subject? My "previous commit" was "qapi: > Simplify QAPISchemaObjectTypeMember.check()", while yours is "qapi: > Eliminate QAPISchemaObjectType.check() variable members". > > Not sure what moving my two patches apart buys you :)
I'm not quite sure either. [Can I blame late-night coding?] For reference, this was your 3/7 patch. I was trying to get to the point of my 'qapi: Check for qapi collisions of flat union branches' (ended up as 19/27) as soon as possible after my tweaks to your 'qapi: Drop obsolete tag value collision assertions' (your 1/7), so that there was less of a gap where avoiding churn on passing vseen(dict) to Variant.check() looked like an unused variable. In my first attempt, I tried floating my patch right after yours. But I quickly discovered that my patch worked better if I built it on top of your 'qapi: Factor out QAPISchemaObjectTypeMember.check_clash()' (your 6/7), which in turn depended on several of your other patches. So the end result of what I posted happens to be whatever order worked for all my cherry-picking, and I still ended up having to tweak both your 1/7 and 3/7 after all. For v10, I may just go back to the order that you first supplied patches in (if for no other reason than to make your commit message more accurate about being a cleanup of the previous patch, with the meaning that you had given it). -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
