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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 97D06C4332D for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 22:08:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 683B820665 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 22:08:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727183AbhAZWA4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2021 17:00:56 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:55119 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2393536AbhAZRwW (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2021 12:52:22 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD8A113E79; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 12:51:41 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=BNI2iGptMfDc y1IF6pLTmdAs3MQ=; b=ZvVj+I0mKwBMhQURmow1Kxe3nSFl41FzziW0PRr4kiPZ U+vA6ZDAysE1qd4zka+KL8MHXtXQHnMuAswY4HWrimbmJUlXQnSpLPCY8cO49wed KgbhQrVzOdBoKJA8ZX5h/0X4+b1l0FOFTo3H8vzpWyj9X1guO5MneJTVbHwgCRU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=WqK2Wy +7sOakNUnVpFsZMWWVd2xIZ8ScK6ahOO5dHNP0KPrXKxnG9FTdfnV+rSFQWCd1V8 lYGMoFtb69zjK5skkFpWqNrcgmeYPSRfMcQdfakz5p/EJuz8gR1bjScPirFEmpEm XuPlsk7ulsrBtHAFKbvGECSG0R1brWmkFkOB8= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59B6113E77; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 12:51:41 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D198113E73; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 12:51:37 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: Jacob Vosmaer , peff@peff.net, git@vger.kernel.org, jeffhost@microsoft.com, jonathantanmy@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] upload-pack.c: fix filter spec quoting bug References: <20210125230952.15468-1-jacob@gitlab.com> <20210125230952.15468-2-jacob@gitlab.com> <874kj46mwf.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 09:51:35 -0800 In-Reply-To: <874kj46mwf.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFyIEFy?= =?utf-8?B?bmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Tue, 26 Jan 2021 10:57:36 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 23302A04-5FFF-11EB-9C1B-D609E328BF65-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason writes: > On Tue, Jan 26 2021, Jacob Vosmaer wrote: > >> This fixes a bug that occurs when you combine partial clone and >> uploadpack.packobjectshook. You can reproduce it as follows: > > Let's:=20 > > * Refer to the commit we're fixing a bug in, i.e. Junio's mention of > 10ac85c7 (upload-pack: add object filtering for partial clone, > 2017-12-08) upthread. > > * See also "imperative-mood" in SubmittingPatches. I.e. say "Fix a bug > in ..." not "This fixes ... can be reproduced as" > > * uploadpack.packObjectsHook not uploadpack.packobjectshook except in = C > code. > > ... [jc: all the helpful hints snipped] ... > > Thanks for hacking this up! Hopefully the above is helpful and not too > nitpicky. Mainly wanted to help you get future patches through more > easily... Yeah, thanks, both, for aiming higher ;-) =20 I have to admit that I did find the log message a bit lacking, and that was why I had to dig bit to find out how the historical issue happened myself in the first place, and I tend to agree that it feels a bit of waste for that work to end up buried in the list archive without getting reflected in the proposed log message.