Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:
> Incidentally, this bug was masked prior to 060d4bb, as the
> initial loose call would taint the later strict call. So the
> commit would succeed (albeit with a bogus committer line in
> the commit object), and nobody noticed that our early check
> did not match the later one.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <p...@peff.net>
> ---
> builtin/commit.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/commit.c b/builtin/commit.c
> index 95eeab1..20cef95 100644
> --- a/builtin/commit.c
> +++ b/builtin/commit.c
> @@ -725,7 +725,7 @@ static int prepare_to_commit(const char *index_file,
> const char *prefix,
> strbuf_release(&sb);
>
> /* This checks if committer ident is explicitly given */
> - strbuf_addstr(&committer_ident, git_committer_info(0));
> + strbuf_addstr(&committer_ident, git_committer_info(IDENT_STRICT));
> if (use_editor && include_status) {
> char *ai_tmp, *ci_tmp;
> if (whence != FROM_COMMIT)
Looks sensible. Is this something we can detect in automated tests,
or is it too cumbersome to set up?
--
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
