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=-4.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 449C71F859 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 18:03:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751966AbcHLSDn (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Aug 2016 14:03:43 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:51756 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751862AbcHLSDm (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Aug 2016 14:03:42 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D8BE33960; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 14:03:41 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=LU/6fffZaqBFR7LnrqbNRatEaKc=; b=D3uG5M YydP3BD7O0Ci6ZfJhucQhIYH8AMQL9PbbSKeCWpY+TxZoWvdCcSjFq03CGrmRydO mnAVPTbkHANbgrFRx/91WbzBDGMEA3M0R/q8XFZsY12PAwOLHIJfyjvOQ7MUg8ze WfqML0x8cchNB7xd7zrtR1RpMufPtSaiR1P+s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=IubWhQlsd2vbqfEG2M9RdB4la7ymA15Y P00otXITwHdIM3MFmpbcBjBawydknKYgM3x5Bqj0ydiXNnqK5YmI2Vc0ytKhCGAR i9BQfQiO8VO0HalSaMg7MpKAyBMoCdIkTN0kY1+geeiRjCQrE4Te+d3zFvu0TrnL 362DdSBIFuA= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 141DF3395F; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 14:03:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DAD63395E; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 14:03:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Lars Schneider Cc: Stefan Beller , Jeff King , "git\@vger.kernel.org" , Jakub =?utf-8?Q?Nar=C4=99?= =?utf-8?Q?bski?= , mlbright@gmail.com, Eric Wong , Johannes Schindelin , ben@wijen.net Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 14/15] convert: add filter..process option References: <20160803164225.46355-1-larsxschneider@gmail.com/> <20160810130411.12419-1-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <20160810130411.12419-15-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <20160812163809.3wdkuqegxfjam2yn@sigill.intra.peff.net> <52049A60-6CEB-40E5-A013-409CFC20252F@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 11:03:38 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Lars Schneider's message of "Fri, 12 Aug 2016 19:21:26 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 199F7E96-60B7-11E6-8C7E-89D312518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Lars Schneider writes: >> Unless the reasoning is "an error in between is so rare that we are >> OK if the protocol misbehaves and the receiving end omits error >> handing", I am not so sure how "therefore additional work is OK" is >> a reasonable conclusion. > > Maybe I need to reword. An error is detected in either way if something > goes wrong. The advantage of the two step status is that if we fail early > then Git does not even need to create structures to read the response. OK, that's much better.