Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] fsck: API improvements

From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 01:54:13 +0100

On Thu, Feb 18 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jeff King <[email-masked]> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 11:12:26AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email-masked]> writes:
>>> 
>>> >> Let's get this reviewed now, but with expectation that it will be
>>> >> rebased after the dust settles.
>>> >
>>> > Makes sense. Pending a review of this would you be interested in queuing
>>> > a v2 of this that doesn't conflict with in-flight topics?
>>> 
>>> Not really.  I am not sure your recent patches are getting
>>> sufficient review bandwidth they deserve.
>>
>> FWIW, I just read through v2 (without having looked at all at v1 yet!),
>> and they all seemed like quite reasonable cleanups. I left a few small
>> comments that might be worth a quick re-roll, but I would also be OK
>> with the patches being picked up as-is.
>
> That's good to hear.  I shouldn't even have bothered to answer the
> question, if the v2 were to have sent to the list without waiting
> for my reply ;-)

FWIW it's not that I didn't care about the reply, but I'm somewhat
intermittently available time/network wise in the coming days. And
there's the TZ difference between us.

I sent v1 thinking you might be willing to pick it up & resolve the
conflict, but since you expressed an interest in deferring it until
conflicting work landed figured I'd ask (and then just sent the patches)
if you'd be interested in a conflict-free version to queue alongside
those changes.

If it was still "nah" fair enough, I'd just wait. But if not those
patches would be there to pickup.

Thanks a lot to you & Jeff for the review on v2. I won't have time to
address all that today, and in any case I got the message that maybe I
should stop firehosing the list with patch series's for a bit :)