Re: [PATCH 0/2] tree-walk improvements

[Junio C Hamano]

David Turner  writes:

> Because truncated, to me, means "something that has been cut off". Here,
> the recorded length is too short, so it's probably not the case that
> something was cut off -- it was never right to begin with.

That's perfectly sensible. Thanks.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] tree-walk improvements

[Junio C Hamano]

David Turner  writes:

> Hopefully the encoding works correctly on these patches. If not, you
> can fetch from
> https://github.com/novalis/git/
> on branch dturner/bad-trees

This does not test cleanly here, unfortunately.  Specifically, tests
30 and 31 t1007 do fine with 1/2 alone, but they seem to break with
2/2 applied.

I didn't dug further.  At least not yet.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] tree-walk improvements

[David Turner]

On Mon, 2016-09-26 at 12:43 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> David Turner  writes:
> 
> > The first patch is a re-roll of Peff's patch from 2014 -- here's
> > the archive message:
> >
> > http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/PATCH-tree-walk-be-more-specific-about-corrupt-tree-errors-td7603558.html
> >
> > Not sure why this wasn't applied then, but I thought it looked pretty
> > good, so I added a few tests.
> 
> Thanks.  Adding tests is very much appreciated.  I however wonder
> why you needed to reword a perfectly readable "truncated" to
> something else, though?

Because truncated, to me, means "something that has been cut off". Here,
the recorded length is too short, so it's probably not the case that
something was cut off -- it was never right to begin with.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] tree-walk improvements

[Junio C Hamano]

David Turner  writes:

> The first patch is a re-roll of Peff's patch from 2014 -- here's
> the archive message:
>
> http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/PATCH-tree-walk-be-more-specific-about-corrupt-tree-errors-td7603558.html
>
> Not sure why this wasn't applied then, but I thought it looked pretty
> good, so I added a few tests.

Thanks.  Adding tests is very much appreciated.  I however wonder
why you needed to reword a perfectly readable "truncated" to
something else, though?

> Email address note 1: my employer wants me to use my company address,
> but not my company computer, for patches I write on work time.  This
> means that I'm going to continue corresponding from
> nova...@novalis.org, but will send patches with the @twosigma.com
> address in the author line.

That seems like not an uncommon practice ;-)

> Email address note 2: I'm not subscribed to the mailing list these
> days, so please CC me (at nova...@novalis.org) on replies.

It is good to tell others this, but I suspect that it is known by
those who are likely to respond to these messages that always CC'ing
to individual is the norm on this list ;-)

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] tree-walk improvements

[Stefan Beller]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:32 PM, David Turner  wrote:
> The first patch is a re-roll of Peff's patch from 2014 -- here's
> the archive message:
>
> http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/PATCH-tree-walk-be-more-specific-about-corrupt-tree-errors-td7603558.html
>
> Not sure why this wasn't applied then, but I thought it looked pretty
> good, so I added a few tests.
>
> Hopefully the encoding works correctly on these patches. If not, you
> can fetch from
> https://github.com/novalis/git/
> on branch dturner/bad-trees
>
> Email address note 1: my employer wants me to use my company address,
> but not my company computer, for patches I write on work time.  This
> means that I'm going to continue corresponding from
> nova...@novalis.org, but will send patches with the @twosigma.com
> address in the author line.

Mind sending a patch for .mailmap to reflect that different email
addresses are still the same person? ;)