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=-3.8 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 599751F66E for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 15:46:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726999AbgHYPqV (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:46:21 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:57402 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726706AbgHYPqR (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:46:17 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72E807F02A; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:46:15 -0400 (EDT) (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=R2d/Q1xKLf+V/cEy6DWdUWaWhP8=; b=uw3ud4 S9Hd1II93Um01i1ebHK5lUN+ZYroLjIY8PhSBNYwPbxxJJsnLQwkL9tdnjEyiEzA BJecAVDgVlGq6hgc/G0KEUy+Dcvihxow0JMdjn2hSppWm/wg7wpM6wDliFTl1//q vSz/FD499xBr9ckNP8pUpY0ksPaQ7o4iaX9ZY= 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=vcytuJAoZlsqzM6te8vVyvlK8/dFIa0Y rKrY5v7EjnxPZ2I3w4ps9OEB4UXyVOfINwji+1wRn2Zc3TpPia/prv1lUEOljleP Xz+kot3QoULowgCh6je+4FjE2A04e66/Bx6Y5sBgcVrgxN3mb5AqI0S47VRvqxCt VYY0YWUxJtE= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B1107F029; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:46:15 -0400 (EDT) (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-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EB56B7F028; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:46:14 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: pw/add-p-allowed-options-fix, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2020, #06; Mon, 24) References: Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 08:46:14 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 25 Aug 2020 10:58:03 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 1BB5272C-E6EA-11EA-A13A-2F5D23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > On Mon, 24 Aug 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> * pw/add-p-allowed-options-fix (2020-08-17) 2 commits >> - add -p: fix checking of user input >> - add -p: use ALLOC_GROW_BY instead of ALLOW_GROW >> >> "git add -p" update. >> >> Will merge to 'next'. > > I thought the consensus was to untangle the refactoring in the second > patch by first fixing the `e` case, and _then_ refactoring? Not really. My take on it is that everybody would agree that the split would be to "fix 'e' without introducing the code structure change" then to "change the code structure to make the bug impossible", _IF_ we were to split the "fix" part into two. I do not think anybody agreed to anything beyond that, and I am leaning toward keeping the "let's change the code structure to make such a bug impossible to introduce---oops, as a side effect we already fixed the 'e' bug", which, as you say, is more than good enough. > With Phillip being offline for a couple days, however, I think we can just > go forward with the patches as-are. They are in "good enough" a shape. Thanks.