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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 2E7601F66F for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 19:30:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728112AbgKFTaW (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:30:22 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:56661 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726447AbgKFTaV (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:30:21 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ADBA101E2B; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:30:20 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) 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=hMAUDHpzwbDiIec5u29HkVDGBpo=; b=kvITyh IZhulgdOOMzSKA+psgPfULfVw8N/uHUbEhBF23P3q6UUf2aARK98bBW+2+Lesk7L Q7GyvOok15ufg4sbKguzSFG9oAcxjXYBieQbBXRF9/7AtbU6N8LYzkk8wb273X6W UynCQ4q2W1Q6Yg0b+ljJk9IJsX6rFdeObOisw= 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=VvC9EafYarnFNQuVFOjIyW9qhbXMxSvB jIznPMnxcFhZFSdoY4dnXqtiEcoDVG97rjwGJzqhj0K3ssu3dqralwmquAS8P8IX 4EG0z4uvZdSGhdUlkMIblqoK27zrvVlUBNGHn5xCu8+s2dP9fBQCr2ShMdDQBl/S y3AiEuR4+AY= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D8D101E2A; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:30:20 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.75.7.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 55D5B101E28; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:30:17 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Patrick Steinhardt , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] update-ref: Allow creation of multiple transactions References: <20201105192901.GA121650@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20201106175241.GA182486@coredump.intra.peff.net> Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 11:30:14 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20201106175241.GA182486@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 6 Nov 2020 12:52:41 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 802653E2-2066-11EB-A365-E43E2BB96649-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 01:34:20PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> > The tests all look quite reasonable to me. Touching .git/refs like this >> > is a bit gross (and something we may have to deal with if we introduce >> > reftables, etc). But it's pretty pervasive in this file, so matching >> > the existing style is the best option for now. >> ... > Yeah, I agree completely that we could be using rev-parse in this > instance. But it's definitely not alone there: > ... Yup, this morning I was reviewing what we said in the previous day's exchanges and noticed that you weren't advocating but merely saying it is not making things worse, and I agree with the assessment. Perhaps two #leftoverbits are to (1) clean up this test to create refs using "update-ref", and verify refs using "show-ref --verify". (2) If (1) had to leave some direct filesystem access due to the built-in safety that cannot be circumvented, decide which is more appropirate between a test-update-ref test helper only to be used in tests, or a "--force" option usable to corrupt repositories with "update-ref", implement it, and use it to finish cleaning up tests. Thanks.