From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,BODY_8BITS, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN, FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A273C1F8C2 for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 15:15:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229617AbhBMPOD (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Feb 2021 10:14:03 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43928 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229531AbhBMPOD (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Feb 2021 10:14:03 -0500 Received: from mail-yb1-xb2e.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C77F2C061574 for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 07:13:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yb1-xb2e.google.com with SMTP id f4so2567872ybk.11 for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 07:13:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Cqb3KdmnXAmsRacKstSFJMiLQVerm4x/3OyL4iTcbkQ=; b=BZSlNfEtorVwg9MHF13vWmkpSs4YRNVkK836wocLI0rBE+XO5TJwgIZZdCJ8W1iQgW UlHEUXE+eeWg5cx/ggVc3DSMiA5YqKwJ3hydWZDUXxa4aeg2y5xwWb7aXz4QNmBqLrci m/zajhpF3WNvod3z5bgHmfGTc/Fsd9iPEdjftv/DA1U2DdtKO2xKjk98BhiN4rLluI7P NvTQRZOvZdEi//+Vtv7vuOCHle3aJ3O3GaRBkvjqSn2TuQeQDqU6RuigbWfacF0p0l0L xIOcBNORAIPyarbfEz9jOIK8aHdiw6n4lhli1tiNa5W78XMOByMI00V629xSmxiIJ6sT BpTA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Cqb3KdmnXAmsRacKstSFJMiLQVerm4x/3OyL4iTcbkQ=; b=UNKKii3P8o3O27T7XV1C5L0CulfO4ASN0QIf9BxDoQPpkbL0k0LkFehR5kGzi5rs3+ iILsalV1euunjZhlNfbsrp4ORuNeBXjs15nfBNd+BkNjh1sq9sKrXcDNt6nHddZu+JfO rBnC/vURF7KEfXTwe20tJRifx6/2OTG7sgAihcoSowKHG0pqWXBaML71RrzPR74Ke0P+ 1PDzuBg+Yp2PLkuWhRYvERjmNaoaXZHN35NTWNkSnhvfCJH84aPmMQ3MbKIzz3hg3pPN ILWGQKXhf0BiXdlY7ogQ5QlTBmNm0nnvwrP5CE9lTmeSDC0+LWZpW8DbmmpFsVitRkYp BX2w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531gZ7IjHOgtiuezrf7mZaUCgbUghvKxeXreRIJw9mSYEYk2psYk k6CByOcF79nHhY3qj1myS58FmTcXwSqCSEWcF9Y= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwWmISuZlLvg/eZFzILAtUu7k1PYO9oovDZzMbnnpilO+4Cvn2+NKF+d0RYzflu045t5yzyWbUibeaEmF99QC4= X-Received: by 2002:a25:1842:: with SMTP id 63mr10639746yby.238.1613229202044; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 07:13:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210120124906.GA8396@szeder.dev> <20210121025331.21658-1-worldhello.net@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jiang Xin Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 23:13:08 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] use unique out file in t5411 To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Git List , =?UTF-8?Q?SZEDER_G=C3=A1bor?= , Johannes Sixt , Jiang Xin Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano =E4=BA=8E2021=E5=B9=B42=E6=9C=8812=E6=97= =A5=E5=91=A8=E4=BA=94 =E4=B8=8A=E5=8D=885:52=E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > > Jiang Xin writes: > > > From: Jiang Xin > > > > t5411 has some test cases for the behavior of failed 'git push' > > commands. Even the 'git push' command ended, the output file > > may still be updated with messages from 'git-receive-pack' command > > running in background. This breaks test cases which reuse the > > same 'out' file. > > I do not recall hearing from SZEDER who raised concerns about "a lot > of churn that can be avoided by a change in the code to die more > gracefully" in his previous round's review. This has been in 'seen' > for a long time, so let's move it down to 'next'. > SZEDER's concerns about "a lot of churn that can be avoided ..." is in this post: https://public-inbox.org/git/20210120124906.GA8396@szeder.dev/ I think current implementation of the client side of git-push is OK. It's no necessary to add more code and more roundtrips for git-push client side to complete the protocol in order to wait for end of the server. -- Jiang Xin