On 2020-09-12 at 03:24:48, Taylor Blau wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 11:38:15PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> > -void initialize_repository_version(int hash_algo);
> > +void initialize_repository_version(int hash_algo, int reinit);
> 
> I'm not a huge fan of adding a 'reinit' parameter to a function that
> itself begins with the word 'initialize' (why wouldn't you call
> 'reinitialize_repository_version()' instead?), but seeing as there are
> only a couple of callers, maybe it is OK.
> 
> Alternatively, I certainly wouldn't complain if you did introduce a new
> function and updated the call-site that passes reinit as 1.

I thought about introducing a new function, but since it would share
almost all of the code, it seemed a bit wasteful, even if the function
is small.  We do have only two callers, I believe, since I recall
making this function non-static and calling it from clone, so I think
it's okay.

> > +test_expect_success 'clone with GIT_DEFAULT_HASH' '
> > +	(
> > +		sane_unset GIT_DEFAULT_HASH &&
> > +		git init test
> > +	) &&
> > +	test_commit -C test foo &&
> > +	git clone test test-clone &&
> > +	git -C test-clone status
> > +'
> > +
> 
> This test looks very reasonable, and certainly demonstrates the bug and
> fix. Thanks.

This is essentially Matheus's testcase.  I considered using env -u to
avoid the subshell but POSIX doesn't specify that, so we have a
subshell.
-- 
brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US