Re: [PATCH 11/15] Add strbuf_vaddf(), use it in strbuf_addf(), and add strbuf_initf()

Do you really think these two patches belong to the series, I seriously
have to wonder?

The series uses strbuf_initf() from 7 call sites to save a few lines per
each call site, and for that you have a 140-line patch to strbuf.c (in
aggregate between this one and the "Oops, I need to support this, too" one
after this).

This new code that is not essential to the series need to be carefully
vetted to avoid risks of potentially affecting existing 70+ users of
strbuf_addf(), which used to use (hopefully more trustworthy) vsnprintf()
from the system, but now uses the new and unproven strbuf_vaddf() that
has "Only supports %<these>" disclaimer at the top.

I am not saying the strbuf_vaddf() patch is not worth considering.  It
might help platforms without a working vsnprintf().  But its merit needs
to be defended separately, and I do not want "merge in C" series to be
taken hostage by it.

Other than that, I did not see anything obviously wrong in the diff
between the previous round and this series.

Thanks.