From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 621294C634 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 06:29:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.147 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712212148; cv=none; b=R/8dfPUbqIDWjW1tC4YrSi9jxTm88dDSRnPbrK/0Ytb1CSBYvHGDiVIiN87tCijVHdL9z8zc8kqd/OiWECUcw9fNIGHAz7Het3WEujv2squniKSe7d2ABtYZF2//AEAjSuh6PgLTBW5z+2mE6pFpiazv6q9/xvT0fOwsc5ZCqSM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712212148; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9en3wynWnsdjzIbW+wLQ0TsUcIpWDa/+YzB8cEawDiQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=HJhcNVWJe2JTlfxtJaLXiV9X35kKWTdQ16QmCGZaJ27WgnrA2R5Bde6CLH72S9WeNF8710Hlf6UAMKutFBk/IpzYUQWV0W0RmuSS8r8PTNd3nJnQwRUL8IaKl+dyqsMJiiisoERlILNj/D4qdGzGSeI1hHr0qj29WqB+Nz4lIkQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b=geJFjaor; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=UO9eRI/G; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.147 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b="geJFjaor"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="UO9eRI/G" Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailfout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C7B513800FB; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 02:29:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 04 Apr 2024 02:29:05 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1712212145; x=1712298545; bh=9en3wynWns djzIbW+wLQ0TsUcIpWDa/+YzB8cEawDiQ=; b=geJFjaorTWaVnmyb9CISo2Y2OR cGxmzjcQYtFTONv0sFVrnzXCZBOXDnxqVuPH0G9la1+CxxE8L5gWfSpYJpMuIgkw dCOT8eZR2Bod+y8VXInArEyp3C0LB0AlAxbLGnCwC120Ub54MzobShTFqw7gFmCi S9+jq7tyIWSxteaQu2b1iCYYjjYMPZBWsgZFxqBPf2UCmBn/4q3eHVC6mY3DW7eu 4yv0mpX0Y3v8XRB3YZCj0KuWzpZKG0FvvST74uAtDrdjWgWrj7TmD8HNqvrp7bbq vQuzXuAuItd36TRoR4i0i6oxziET0j/oTIqN035EMGcY3F6jeJ2Wd6sUjSjQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1712212145; x=1712298545; bh=9en3wynWnsdjzIbW+wLQ0TsUcIpW Da/+YzB8cEawDiQ=; b=UO9eRI/Gx4uufQPPGv9jqZfkW1IsYOaG8rM/lxWbIZpj GIA4/D0AZCHvU5iOLbdCVEzV78GeUj22yEQJCFPMj24Os7bw+GPm2rdvDE+7aQki 72rvAg8NYxCaXFMqh1W27IcmPmyh1Ez1aPsYl0OIgTENP/+BPeZQ5aIzM1p7ERS3 EbdQib78c81MPVgWZVEPH+3laUwDhKrm8mFmllQLi57I+uHtHPEFpZcd1fY1BqEj 7dCaiCWctGW4OetG42Y3kl+HDUlairRUwGD2mL53xMDuQzaTG+xxD5DN4SU/XsbB UOYmE3ZEIn812NYBnWfSPjpuvL0X32PSHuD6b6wajg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrudefjedguddtlecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrrght rhhitghkucfuthgvihhnhhgrrhguthcuoehpshesphhkshdrihhmqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeeukedtvedtffevleejtefgheehieegkeeluddvfeefgeehgfeltddtheejleff teenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehpsh esphhkshdrihhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 02:29:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 99b204fc (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Thu, 4 Apr 2024 06:29:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 08:29:01 +0200 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: Jeff King Cc: Han-Wen Nienhuys , git , Josh Steadmon Subject: Re: reftable & jgit compatibility Message-ID: References: <20240403205451.GD1949464@coredump.intra.peff.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xsmuIQEqs68VQTue" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240403205451.GD1949464@coredump.intra.peff.net> --xsmuIQEqs68VQTue Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 04:54:51PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 12:47:15PM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: >=20 > > I very much agree, this thought has crossed my mind multiple times while > > working on the whole reftable saga. Ideally, we would have integration > > tests that write reftables with one of the implementations and then read > > them with the respective other implementation. I wouldn't really know > > where to put those though. CGit is very unlikely to pull in JGit as a > > test dependency. Does JGit have any tests that already use CGit? >=20 > We do have some tests that use jgit to check bitmap interoperability. > But obviously they're optional, and I suspect they are not run very > often (I do have jgit in my path these days, so I run them, but I assume > most people don't). It probably wouldn't be too hard to include it in > one of the CI runs, though. You can grep for the JGIT prereq in t/. Oh, that's great, I didn't know about that! I will take a look at updating our CI systems to include JGit... > We had another test that used jgit to check for some protocol > interoperability. But it was broken with sha256 and nobody noticed. ;) > There I replaced it with a hard-coded input. See 13e67aa39b (v0 > protocol: fix sha1/sha256 confusion for capabilities^{}, 2023-04-14) for > some discussion. =2E.. also to avoid rotting tests like this. > I think using actual jgit (versus a hard-coded input) is a good basic > smoke test: it tells us if the two can interoperate generally. But for > testing specific inputs like the case in 13e67aa39b, we are depending on > jgit producing that specific behavior (which in this case, it probably > wasn't any more). And there we are better off just with a manual test > vector. Agreed. I will add some basic interop tests that ensure that JGit and CGit can read their respective formats. I don't want it to be too fancy initially, but it's good to have a baseline which we can iterate from in the future. Patrick --xsmuIQEqs68VQTue Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEF9hrgiFbCdvenl/rVbJhu7ckPpQFAmYOSKwACgkQVbJhu7ck PpTOLA/9F64/iDxTozBQvkxwAn5Lr9ATUawgwt3WXQaTAsEhIgO+/c4vBlSB2o+D +F2/aYc9rlxSP6Q7MHTUz4rZSujcF9mhRjZEbr4EBINuUrvwfMMbLW/eKqCuIZQl NBP9YMD0R/dh0PV2cSpD8fFnN/C3hZKKpaL+9ZJwLh2bbGkkmpAYfe9iSj03sMcd dgLUCEPuERxbEogs8NdR4OC+/Zz5ZERjj7szL8L8uVtaTx2KtaJkt08fXwF/wW2s paLN86OJ8zxallc4Y9T9HqjUEc4Y9wziwI7gC//gdLCTIUnYzlauUHa7fBlGwKFo Gxnxuju+XAlM1ltNcEshPLz4t9m4FRaUyPM989xSExT532nSnF+e8i3W1uIlYfPQ naVCTBwBctSbOVlIq6XTNg3Q44EJdoAKvKaP1/a7QZ8tzBj+OUrWFUATJb3ZzEkn KJX00WQUZiaN31tjBrKZGd9dMQ2m0p2DcL2EURmysetKvxt6snA4xe6VjDMhaj9x Sajg6cAbn3zITZRMsT4gUOYPH3kCBS3lu7iISb2IyuCebTOkYCeT9VmiRG0UCT65 PLLgIA8juftSdOel90Ew1S2ReM/NE2tJrRfJazdNoGwHfKz7ew4vg4+G2/N0obdY ohycnN8vcWBtLkEuk8PP+Dvh5X4odbuUBT7aUqG0xshh1Jt+mxY= =89e7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xsmuIQEqs68VQTue--