Shawn Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I'm thinking that can't be right. Shouldn't fsck-objects be doing > better checking on commits? > > The reason I ask is I'm working on my (bastard) fast-import program > for Jon's Mozilla CVS -> GIT conversion effort and I'm taking the > author and committer lines blind from the Python code. If the > Python code gives me a bad line its going to go into the pack that > way, with that possibly resulting in a totally corrupt repository. > I hoped to apply the same verification that fsck-objects applies > but apparently it doesn't do anything. :-) > > I'm willing to write some better validation in fsck-objects.c > and submit the patch if folks think we should do stronger checks > in there. Historical repositories (e.g. very early days of git, linux-2.6 just after 2.6.12-rc2, and sparse) used to have commit objects that recorded committer dates in RFC2822 format not the current unixtime format. I think all of them have been converted later, but not warning or checking these fields may be related to it. In general stricter check is always preferred. I just wanted to mention the older repositories as something we might want to keep in mind. - To unsubscribe from this list: 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