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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, 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 E99AE1FC44 for ; Tue, 9 May 2017 02:21:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754326AbdEICVW (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 May 2017 22:21:22 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:47769 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753846AbdEICVV (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 May 2017 22:21:21 -0400 Received: (qmail 9414 invoked by uid 109); 9 May 2017 02:21:16 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 09 May 2017 02:21:16 +0000 Received: (qmail 18511 invoked by uid 111); 9 May 2017 02:21:46 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Mon, 08 May 2017 22:21:46 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 08 May 2017 22:21:14 -0400 Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 22:21:14 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: disable pack reuse for object-selection options Message-ID: <20170509022114.s3tpxrgtplsopr4x@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20170502084326.65eisqmr4th5cbf7@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170508073143.lu73w5b54lvstty2@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170509020010.meefcustv7uufard@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 11:14:18AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > >> Ah, OK, and now I understand why you called this a "bug" (which is > >> older and do not need to be addressed as part of 2.13) in the > >> original message. The new tests check requests that ought to > >> produce an empty packfile as the result actually do, but with the > >> current code, the reuse code does not work with --local and friends > >> and ends up including what was requested to be excluded. > > > > Right. Did you want me to try re-wording the commit message, or does it > > make sense now? > > It does make sense to me now, but I do not speak for all future > readers of "git log", so... I guess what I was asking was: do you still think it was unclear, or do you think you were just being dense? I don't feel like I gave any information in the follow-on explanation that wasn't in the commit message, so I wasn't clear if I worded it better or if it just sunk in better. -Peff