On Tue, 2015-10-13 at 18:21 -0400, David Turner wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-10-13 at 13:29 +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> > I reviewed the patches up to here pretty carefully, and aside from the
> > comments I already sent, they look good.
> >
> > I like the new approach where the ref_transaction-buil
On Tue, 2015-10-13 at 13:29 +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> I reviewed the patches up to here pretty carefully, and aside from the
> comments I already sent, they look good.
>
> I like the new approach where the ref_transaction-building code is
> shared across backends.
>
> It seems to me that a
I reviewed the patches up to here pretty carefully, and aside from the
comments I already sent, they look good.
I like the new approach where the ref_transaction-building code is
shared across backends.
It seems to me that a good breaking point for the first batch of patches
would be here, just b
On 10/12/2015 11:51 PM, David Turner wrote:
> The common ref code will build up a ref transaction. Backends will
> then commit it. So the transaction creation and update functions should
> be in the common code. We also need to move the ref structs into
> the common code so that alternate backen
The common ref code will build up a ref transaction. Backends will
then commit it. So the transaction creation and update functions should
be in the common code. We also need to move the ref structs into
the common code so that alternate backends can access them.
Later, we will modify struct re
5 matches
Mail list logo
