Re: [PATCH 0/4] merge-tree: handle missing objects correctly

Patrick Steinhardt
2024-02-07T07:42:49Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 910 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 09:49:37AM +0000, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote:
> I recently looked into issues where git merge-tree calls returned bogus data
> (in one instance returning an empty tree for non-empty merge parents). By
> the time I had a look at the corresponding repository, the issue was no
> longer reproducible, but a closer look at the code combined with some manual
> experimenting turned up the fact that missing tree objects aren't handled as
> errors by git merge-tree.
>
> While at it, I added a commit on top that tries to catch all remaining
> unchecked parse_tree() calls.
>
> This patch series is based on js/merge-tree-3-trees because I introduced
> three unchecked parse_tree() calls in that topic branch.

These patches all look good to me, thanks! I have two nits for the first
patch, but I don't really think that those are worth a reroll.

Patrick

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]