From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11BDB201B0 for ; Sat, 25 Feb 2017 12:53:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751284AbdBYMxa (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Feb 2017 07:53:30 -0500 Received: from smtp-out-1.talktalk.net ([62.24.135.65]:47959 "EHLO smtp-out-1.talktalk.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751214AbdBYMxa (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Feb 2017 07:53:30 -0500 Received: from PhilipOakley ([92.31.218.76]) by smtp.talktalk.net with SMTP id hblRcdpvs0KuvhblRcxLrp; Sat, 25 Feb 2017 12:47:54 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [92.31.218.76] X-Spam: 0 X-OAuthority: v=2.2 cv=RZjSMBlv c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=e6L6E7eW+5Nb7SO+DvSdIg==:117 a=e6L6E7eW+5Nb7SO+DvSdIg==:17 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=yPCof4ZbAAAA:8 a=PWi42-BxNWIbCxg3-QgA:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=2lfDSYhZ3Z6b8uxcDO-Z:22 Message-ID: <36746FDD909546E29F39F1040810DA17@PhilipOakley> Reply-To: "Philip Oakley" From: "Philip Oakley" To: "Junio C Hamano" , , "Vegard Nossum" Cc: "Christian Couder" , "Michal Zalewski" References: <20170225101307.24067-1-vegard.nossum@oracle.com> <0cdd4304-7b71-c38d-21ab-b4e997242bd4@oracle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] apply: guard against renames of non-existant empty files Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 12:47:55 -0000 Organization: OPDS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfDDs+0Wd9QvxpbLf3sGzayIp6vrL5f7gFfSogEIh5JLLRUb8kBi109/efTsAArfIlmHWuQM5peNADFK++beJrecsv87r0eYw9al40fF4e+32vBFaCxuF J/yXECchDRq9criCE+utBckomQKYpeMTJAX7DBaFVPFDYju2d9z5/sae2PvFSfOeCrWHQRBD4itidn5+RRE0sggGPeqg8srp9Agy9fSMwq/KTLcWo0Oe21yA cyGZF9ff46OOsmsveQFaTxugIQrStbA6slW2B2QlMOGS7W8QQrKb8UE4e4aJv9Je Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org From: "Vegard Nossum" > On 25/02/2017 12:59, Philip Oakley wrote: >> From: "Vegard Nossum" >>> If we have a patch like the one in the new test-case, then we will >> >> "the one in the new test-case" needs a clearer reference to the >> particular case so that future readers will know what it refers to. >> Noticed while browsing the commit message.. > > There is only one testcase added by this patch, so how is it possibly > unclear? In what situation would you read a commit message and not even > think to glance at the patch for more details? > On initial reading of a commit message, the expectation is that the commit will be about a change from some previous state, so I immediately asked myself, where is that new (recent) test case from. You could say "This patch presents a new test case" which would straight away set the expectation that one should read on to see what its about. It was just that as a reader of the log message I didn't pick up the sense you wanted to convey. It's easy to see with hindsight or fore-knowledge. I, personally, think that bringing the AFL discovery to the fore would help in explaining why/how the patch appeared in the first place. Hope that helps explain why I responded. regards Philip