From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Pitre Subject: Re: Unresolved issues #3 Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:10:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <7vpseyelcw.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <44E546F2.7070902@gmail.com> <44E5D522.8030407@gmail.com> <44E68DCD.8010603@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Aug 21 01:10:30 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GEwR1-0005Ix-Ou for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 01:10:28 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751792AbWHTXKZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:10:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751794AbWHTXKZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:10:25 -0400 Received: from relais.videotron.ca ([24.201.245.36]:15170 "EHLO relais.videotron.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751792AbWHTXKY (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:10:24 -0400 Received: from xanadu.home ([74.56.106.175]) by VL-MO-MR004.ip.videotron.ca (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-2.05 (built Apr 28 2005)) with ESMTP id <0J4B0026GKDBH640@VL-MO-MR004.ip.videotron.ca> for git@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:10:23 -0400 (EDT) In-reply-to: <44E68DCD.8010603@gmail.com> X-X-Sender: nico@localhost.localdomain To: A Large Angry SCM Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, A Large Angry SCM wrote: > Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, A Large Angry SCM wrote: > >> That doesn't prove the non-existence of other code to do it. > > > > So? If the official and primary code for GIT doesn't support it, what > > is the point? I'm telling you that if such packs exist they will simply > > barf with all official GIT releases later than v1.1.6 making your > > argument pointless. > > > > I don't mind you documenting that historic intent for a bit that was > > never officially used, but at least let's document it right. > > Historic fact. Between Thu May 19 08:56:22 2005 and Thu Feb 9 21:06:38 > 2006 bit 6 of the first byte of a delta hunk was interpreted to mean > that the source of the copy was the result buffer. From Thu May 19 > 08:56:22 2005 on, the code to decode delta hunks in type 2 packs was > available to everyone and anyone interested could make a pack encoder > that would create packs that the core Git code would correctly read. The > commit of Thu Feb 9 21:06:38 2006, d60fc, actually introduced a bug > that would treat valid type 2 packs as invalid. The "actually introduced a bug" sentence is your own interpretation not a _fact_. And I simply disagree with that interpretation of yours. I don't think this is worth arguing any further. Nicolas