On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 8:59 AM Boqun Feng <boqun.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 08:41:49AM -0400, Tamir Duberstein wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 8:37 AM Boqun Feng <boqun.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 09:34:42AM +0000, Benno Lossin wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > The rest Rust code changes look good to me. Although I would suggest > > > > > you > > > > > to split this patch into several patches: you can do the conversion > > > > > from > > > > > "as" pattern to provenance API one file by one file, and this make it > > > > > easier for people to review. And after the conversions are done, you > > > > > can > > > > > introduce the Makefile changes. > > > > > > > > I think it's fine to do several of the `as` conversions in a single > > > > > > Well, "fine" != "recommended", right? ;-) If the patch was split, > > > reviewers would be able to give Reviewed-by to individual patches that > > > looks fine trivially. Then it's easier to make progress every iteration, > > > and also allows partially applying the changes. Of course it doesn't > > > have to be file-by-file. > > > > I sent v4 a little while ago, hopefully the resulting complexity is > > manageable now that the build system is untouched. > > > > I have fun plans today (skiing!), so won't be able to take another > detailed look. What I was trying to say is that: should you split the > patches, I would have already given some Reviewed-bys ;-) But as Benno > said, it's fine, so don't worry, I will take another look later. Thanks!
Have fun! ⛷️
