Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 42/43] refs: add LMDB refs backend

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 12:08:21 -0700

Michael Haggerty <[email-masked]> writes:

> I'm really happy about your work.
>
> Regarding strategy: I think a good approach would be to get as much of
> the preparatory work as possible (the abstraction and separation of
> refs-be-files) to the point where it can be merged before there is too
> much more code churn in the area. That work is not very controversial, I
> think, and letting it wait for a long time will increase the likelihood
> of conflicts with other people's changes. The refs-be-lmdb patches, on
> the other hand, (1) will take longer to get polished, (2) will take
> longer to review because other people are not familiar with LDMB, and
> (3) won't bitrot very fast anyway because they don't overlap as much
> with areas that other people are likely to work on. So I would advocate
> working on those at a more deliberate pace and planning for them to be
> merged as a separate batch.

I agree with you on all counts.

My wish is for you to play an interim maintainer starting around
week #7 (Nov 9th) of this cycle and merge the early "preparatory"
part to 'next' before I come back around the end of November ;-)
to be shipped as part of the release at the end of this cycle.

Thanks.