From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: shejialuo <shejialuo@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2025, #09; Fri, 28)
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 07:27:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z8adWTssWtaNTfx4@pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqldtmvyfa.fsf@gitster.g>
On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 09:03:53AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> shejialuo <shejialuo@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 04:45:31PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> * sj/ref-consistency-checks-more (2025-02-27) 9 commits
> >> - builtin/fsck: add `git refs verify` child process
> >> - packed-backend: check whether the "packed-refs" is sorted
> >> - packed-backend: add "packed-refs" entry consistency check
> >> - packed-backend: check whether the refname contains NUL characters
> >> - packed-backend: add "packed-refs" header consistency check
> >> - packed-backend: check if header starts with "# pack-refs with: "
> >> - packed-backend: check whether the "packed-refs" is regular file
> >> - builtin/refs: get worktrees without reading head information
> >> - t0602: use subshell to ensure working directory unchanged
> >>
> >> "git fsck" becomes more careful when checking the refs.
> >>
> >> Comments?
> >> source: <Z8CMx7O19PMs9sVY@ArchLinux>
> >
> > I think I have addressed the comments from you, Patrick and Karthik.
> > Could we make the patch into "next"?
>
> Mine was merely a small kibitzing on the logic flow structure, and I
> didn't really looked at the larger picture beyond that part of the
> code I looked at. Let's hear from Patrick and Karthik (cc'ed) if
> they find the result of the updates satisfactory.
Yes, I'm happy with the current state of this patch series. I'm a tiny
bit worried about the new call to `git refs verify` in git-fsck(1) being
added this late into the release cycle as we're now exercising a bunch
of new code with only a few weeks of testing. My basic assumption is
that mostly noone uses `git refs verify` explicitly right now, so all of
the code we have introduced there over the last couple of releases did
not yet receive much testing at all.
So while I think that executing the command in git-fsck(1) is a good
thing overall, I would feel a bit more comfortable if that last commit
of the series landed in the next release cycle. But maybe I'm just being
overly cautious?
Patrick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-04 6:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-01 0:45 What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2025, #09; Fri, 28) Junio C Hamano
2025-03-03 15:24 ` shejialuo
2025-03-03 17:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-03-04 6:27 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2025-03-04 12:25 ` shejialuo
2025-03-04 15:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-03-07 10:48 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-03-04 6:31 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-03-04 7:02 ` ps/reftable-sans-compat-util, was " Johannes Schindelin
2025-03-04 7:40 ` Johannes Schindelin
2025-03-04 9:46 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-03-04 10:06 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-03-26 16:57 ` Johannes Schindelin
2025-03-27 15:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-03-28 5:36 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-03-28 15:31 ` Johannes Schindelin
2025-03-30 0:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-03-29 23:56 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Z8adWTssWtaNTfx4@pks.im \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=karthik.188@gmail.com \
--cc=shejialuo@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).