From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (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 3163281AD9 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 17:46:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706032006; cv=none; b=P/UvmbhoWLs9MK0BTaLX7z+J0etslGyHKWPnurSesEGlA4poUWIr0aSczJGxrW6XxnrvPvkN+Akvo/pIY4VR9A3YMaYIhSwVSR/fDCfJPW9BtuPSmYn7Mmr2w7IzP+EsFA6jrTKmIPGwueIt0dt+ioBoVjkwNij+9s3irQZZxJU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706032006; c=relaxed/simple; bh=afuRY+i7kQFTKl1iftV2sQzYPtytYsvU3hkilEFrTIA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ORoM30BEXz8/CsXdLBXvrGQwF5YvrID2CKjbdty3nOipIUTxdID87QecoSMIBjHPcWLLNpZJO2V7McYgqv2j9JsVre5E3JQwoskHJDQYLZ/axd0M13kiDvb1hgG2ZhCDil7WWoy6dpw4c2hHdDJvdCnVBUGi4JuNgjVSdJbOHwo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=qS3V2r7/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="qS3V2r7/" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA79A1DB62F; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 12:46:43 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=afuRY+i7kQFTKl1iftV2sQzYPtytYsvU3hkilE FrTIA=; b=qS3V2r7/HXMaHFp5NJS0qdPHFJp7xDCroBvMcO7Dx9MnOaWBKfEFbG TZUmXWl9+8ZtLEzWDziWVlVqOaqBzEeMTcK4MM4GCYdQ+KpTN+9gXw2zmx+5BepB JnHWRrK08jNHGsiNpOjUwBaggpMWvS4IeazVKAOSK/zf8ITw5NU74= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B310E1DB62E; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 12:46:43 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.200.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 25A881DB62D; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 12:46:43 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Karthik Nayak Cc: phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk, git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] refs: make `is_pseudoref_syntax()` stricter In-Reply-To: (Karthik Nayak's message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2024 04:49:27 -0800") References: <20240119142705.139374-1-karthik.188@gmail.com> <20240119142705.139374-3-karthik.188@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 09:46:42 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5EBFA200-BA17-11EE-B3B6-78DCEB2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Karthik Nayak writes: > Given this, I think for the next version, I'll do the following changes: > 1. keep `is_pseudoref_syntax()` as is. > 2. introduce `is_pseudoref()` which calls `is_pseudoref_syntax()` and > also checks the content of the file. > 3. replace use of `is_pseudoref_syntax()` with `is_pseudoref()` in this > patch series. The content check in 2. was something that was mentioned in an earlier discussion, lack of which I completely missed during the review of this current round. Sounds very good to add that. Thanks.