From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AF27C433EF for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 17:12:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10C7860F26 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 17:12:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229379AbhINROB (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:14:01 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49424 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229517AbhINRN6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:13:58 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd32.google.com (mail-io1-xd32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d32]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 761DDC061574 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:12:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd32.google.com with SMTP id b200so18107744iof.13 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:12:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=kimyR/e1FfLtkvPZdMYvDO+VSOSq5Ak3jjZzN3tmzXo=; b=Gs6FqAoqlZQMnUatNu4Igk8pRSqG5tEHGQshTKRa8JOiIkE2kIonPpB/dB+3Klprxp WpCObmWixuukQhxvNYXqs50kpRZFwfBT2iZH3sCUc6do0pmMAcBNlfIA6AucdX4OqfJv jbbrEHfAeMfbPb2AzpEQMQUxyiQDhhUYWn10sw6lZcgAug/ON3ckT3riw4Avu+V5wU0Z N+dTxLcjm0g4EAp7cCru7FTbp1+5KBrhkRK0zbFUAn5VxWbgdR/xLuW1QOJGDjicvxTP vR0ObWsw9GW97wz1HLR6KiC7GVoNjdgTEflgcDotK3on/HOYc8EPXFlHAEdF9cYatcAx YwJg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=kimyR/e1FfLtkvPZdMYvDO+VSOSq5Ak3jjZzN3tmzXo=; b=etnaY/72mBj/GsPRsx6u4sWIxMWEz8xobJItYOKVkHE/0ixNcBo/l4ekt1dGKwpOkY QTvy3LVmHFTvzL9FAb7q5p+UQ00yuBT/2lCVm2VOiG7wFDQthg0xLex8xh69IJsUlkO1 oHE4ulpucEojL3U6eUEtt7b/goK8pSTnwJX++Z5kP3LrH6cCVLg6I0u6sszB1YNn/dDk Jp0MazwJzdlrmtvXJRNY+P5b/qOzhV7FfVL7Xdkfgw5sPA9N98G/pnR6q79cNpr3Kkmb rs1ZHM22wbe15vjAaA9bAEe1dRxdjnhbegmAe28qvnXJ/gEqZ1OEcJnh39onYXjVO1fO HV/w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531E0L/VBUuHOe99xbCZPsFfxuNm7GiHfQoVezCBl2iyksQslYh3 LEUMiOwP+q3gSNpDHezZZaBsbELOIj8x/uKP X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwzmlGKH+8ZEZujfseHCZB1+fttx2/lt2ZbFfUXxgfLNwmWnlaxeqGO/GEL+Z4oduZBMGkWZg== X-Received: by 2002:a02:7818:: with SMTP id p24mr15558501jac.72.1631639560855; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:12:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q11sm4464828ilg.85.2021.09.14.10.12.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:12:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:12:39 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Jeff King Cc: Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] serve: provide "receive" function for session-id capability Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 01:06:42PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 12:55:01PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:33:09AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > > I had originally dropped has_capability() in a separate patch, to keep > > > this one more readable. That breaks bisectability, but only with > > > -Werror. I'm not sure where we should fall on that spectrum (I generally > > > bisect with -Wno-error just because warnings may come and go when > > > working with different compilers than what was normal at the time). > > > > I tend to fall the same way, especially when bisecting things in ancient > > (to me) versions of Git where my current compiler complains. So I think > > the approach that you took here is just fine. > > To be clear, the approach here is conservative: it will bisect even with > -Werror. I think what you're saying is I _could_ have done the other > approach, and put the removal into its own commit? Yes. I would have been fine with dropping has_capability() in its own patch, since the result would have been more readable (and since I never bisect with `-Werror`). But this (the conservative approach of persevering bisect-ability even with `-Werror` is fine with me, too). > -Peff Thanks, Taylor