Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] fetch: extract writing to FETCH_HEAD

Patrick Steinhardt [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

As an abstraction, it may be better to make the caller pass a
boolean "is this for merge?" and keep the knowledge of what exact
string is used for merge_status_marker to this function, instead of
letting the caller passing it as a parameter in the string form.
After all, we never allow anything other than an empty string or a
fixed "not-for-merge" string in that place in the file format.
[Nit #2]

I think it's even nicer to just pass in `rm->fetch_head_status`
directly, which allows us to move below switch into `append_fetch_head`.

OK.  That may even be better.

Thanks.