Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] read-cache: leave lock in right state in `write_locked_index()`
On 6 October 2017 at 14:02, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Martin Ågren writes: > >> On 6 October 2017 at 04:01, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Martin Ågren writes: >>> v2: Except for the slightly different documentation in cache.h, this is a squash of the last two patches of v1. I hope the commit message is better. >>> >>> Yeah, it is long ;-) but readable. >> >> "Long but readable"... Yeah. When I rework the previous patch (document >> the closing-behavior of `do_write_index()`) I could address this. I >> think there are several interesting details here and I'm not sure which >> I'd want to leave out, but yeah, they add up... > > I didn't mean "long is bad" at all in this case. > > Certainly, from time to time we find commits with overlong > explanation that only states obvious, and they are "long and bad". > But I do not think this one falls into the same category as those. Ok, thanks. I've got a rerolled series running through the final checks right now. I did end up making this log message a bit more succinct.
Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] read-cache: leave lock in right state in `write_locked_index()`
Martin Ågren writes: > On 6 October 2017 at 04:01, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Martin Ågren writes: >> >>> v2: Except for the slightly different documentation in cache.h, this is >>> a squash of the last two patches of v1. I hope the commit message is >>> better. >> >> Yeah, it is long ;-) but readable. > > "Long but readable"... Yeah. When I rework the previous patch (document > the closing-behavior of `do_write_index()`) I could address this. I > think there are several interesting details here and I'm not sure which > I'd want to leave out, but yeah, they add up... I didn't mean "long is bad" at all in this case. Certainly, from time to time we find commits with overlong explanation that only states obvious, and they are "long and bad". But I do not think this one falls into the same category as those.
Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] read-cache: leave lock in right state in `write_locked_index()`
On 6 October 2017 at 04:01, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Martin Ågren writes: > >> v2: Except for the slightly different documentation in cache.h, this is >> a squash of the last two patches of v1. I hope the commit message is >> better. > > Yeah, it is long ;-) but readable. "Long but readable"... Yeah. When I rework the previous patch (document the closing-behavior of `do_write_index()`) I could address this. I think there are several interesting details here and I'm not sure which I'd want to leave out, but yeah, they add up... Martin
Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] read-cache: leave lock in right state in `write_locked_index()`
Martin Ågren writes: > v2: Except for the slightly different documentation in cache.h, this is > a squash of the last two patches of v1. I hope the commit message is > better. Yeah, it is long ;-) but readable. Thanks.
