Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Shawn Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> I've swallowed all 10 and pushed them out in "pu", but could you
> >> add tests to check the Porcelainish commands you touched with
> >> this series to make sure they all log correctly?
> >
> > Sure. I've been putting it off as I've been busy the past few days
> > and have also been thinking about trying to rebuild reflog using a
> > tag/annotation branch style, which might be more generally useful
> > to others.
>
> It appears that there is more serious breakage caused by the
> lock_ref change. http-fetch in "next" fails to clone, because
> the call to lock-ref-sha1 in fetch.c::pull() forgets that the
> program might be creating a new ref.
Hmm. I thought I was doing the same thing fetch used to do which
appeared to only work on refs which already exist, and not creating
new refs...
> Another breakage I found (not related to ref-log) is that it
> appears fetch.c, even in "master" branch [*1*], has current_ref
> variable and does things depending on it, but nobody seems to
> set that variable, so there are a lot of dead code that looks as
> if they are doing something useful, enclosed in sections like:
>
> if (somethingelse && current_ref) {
> dead code
> }
I wondered about that code...
--
Shawn.
-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html