> On 13 Jun 2020, at 3:20 pm, Theo Buehler <t...@theobuehler.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:35:42AM +1000, David Gwynne wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:37:59PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
>>> I finally found the time to think about the mathematics of this some
>>> more and I'm now convinced that it's a sound construction. I hope that
>>> one or the other observation below will be useful for you.
>>
>> Yes, I read everything below and it sounds great and useful. My only
>> issue is that I'd like to show the application of those changes as
>> commits in the tree. I already feel the diff I originally posted has
>> diverged too far from the dfly code and a lot of why I made the changes
>> have been lost.
>
> I'm fine with tweaking things in tree. I have reviewed the original code
> and it looks good. The API looks sane. You have my ok for the original
> diff (modulo the typos I pointed out), but it's really not my part of
> the tree...
>
> Once it's landed, I can provide diffs for the tweaks for the internals I
> suggested. We can also wait with those until some consumers are wired
> up, so we can actually test them.
Alright. I'm going to start putting it into the tree tomorrow unless someone
with a good reason objects.
