Hi Junio, On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > > > When our toolset has become too tight without leaving enough escape > > hatch to hinder further development, it is very sensible to at least > > think about adding a new "--for-debug" option to hash-object and > > pack-objects that allows us to deliberately create broken > > datastreams to test against. > > > > [...] > > It wasn't too painful to do one of them, and the result looks rather > nice. I was loathe to make it easier for interested parties to create invalid Git objects and to push them onto servers that cannot yet benefit from my patch series. At the very least, I would have preferred to put such functionality into test-* executables (where I searched for that functionality in the first place), i.e. outside the distributed binaries. But since you already did the work and it does the job, I won't worry about it. A bigger worry is that the additional test verifies that fsck catches the invalid tag object and exits, when we really want to be certain that "git fetch --strict" will abort on such an object. So the test is still indirect, although I admit that it is closer now to what we want. Version 4 of the patch series (without your hash-object --literally patch because mailed patch series cannot declare on what branches from 'pu' they rely, I always base my patch series on 'next' for that reason [*1*]) coming up. Ciao, Dscho Footnote *1*: As always, I push my patch series to a topic branch on GitHub. The one corresponding to the upcoming patch series is in https://github.com/dscho/git/compare/next...fsck-tag, the one with your additional test in https://github.com/dscho/git/compare/next...fsck-tag-plus (the latter being a thicket rather than a linear topic branch). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
