On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday 22 November 2017 12:08 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> The original code unconditionally uses "+ 11", which says that the >> prefix is _always_ present. This commit message muddies the waters [...] > > That muddiness of that statement is a consequence of my recent encounter[1] > in which the assumption (that the prefix(refs/heads/ always exists) of that > code failed. I had a little suspicion, when I wrote that commit message, > that there might be other cases in which assumption might fail. The issue > has been resolved only in 3/4 of jc/branch-name-sanity but that was only > after I wrote the commit message initially. So, it does make sense to > remove that muddiness now. Thanks for noting that. > > [1]: Note the 'warning: ' message in the following mail. That ugly '|�?' was > a consequence of the assumption that the 'prefix' always existed! > https://public-inbox.org/git/1509209933.2256.4.ca...@gmail.com/
Thanks for the explanation and history reference.
