Subject: Re: [PATCH] [Outreachy] patch-ids: fix const correctness

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 10:29:10 -0700

Okhuomon Ajayi <[email-masked]> writes:

> I’ll revert my local change, run a build and tests, and then think
> about safer alternatives (or leave the NEEDSWORK comment in place if
> changing the hashmap API isn’t appropriate).
> Thanks for the clarification.

If you can convince readers that changing the hashmap API is not
appropriate, then I would think that would make a great explanation
for a commit that removes the needswork comment without doing
anything else.  "Thinking about const correctness issues around this
code is no longer needed.  The hashmap API is right to insist that
the extra data pointer must be const because ....  Which makes
casting constness away when assigning it to opt, which is what the
code is, is indeed the only reasonable thing to do, and there is no
more change necessary around here."  Of course, such a commit log
message must fill in the "because ..." part with a convincing
argument ;-).

Thanks.