Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] sequencer: pass `onto` to complete_action() as object-id

From: Oswald Buddenhagen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 22:36:09 +0100

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 07:34:57PM +0000, Phillip Wood wrote:
>On 23/03/2023 16:22, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>> ... instead of as a commit, which makes the purpose clearer and will
>> simplify things later.
>
>given that we want onto to be a commit I'm not sure how this makes 
>anything clearer.
>
it makes it clearer that we need only the oid, not any other part of the 
commit object. and pulling ahead the "extraction" reduces the visual 
noise further down.

>> As a side effect, this change revealed that skip_unnecessary_picks() was
>> butchering the commit object due to missing const-correctness. Slightly
>> adjust its API to rectify this.
>
>I don't think this is correct. If you look at the original code it makes 
>a copy of the oid and uses the copy when calling skip_unnecessary_picks()
>
oops, you're quite right. (facepalm)
imo the change still makes sense, though, as it replaces the relatively 
expensive deep copies with simple pointer updates. so just fix the 
commit message?