On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:06:32AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > It so happens that http-push.c never looked at remote_tail to do further > processing on the list after match_refs() returned, and that is why your > patch does not break http-push.c. > > Any third-party patch to http-push.c > that relied on the old guarantee will textually merge cleanly but will > subtly break with this change. > > Other parts of this patch removes the local "remote_tail" variables, and > it is very clear that they do not have this problem; any third-parth patch > will break if they used remote_tail after match_refs() returned, so this > change is a safe one for them. Yes, I tried to get rid of remote_tail entirely, but I could not come up with a solution immediately. We could insert to the front of the list instead. I'll try that. > I wonder what interaction this change will have with the http-push > clean-up Ray Chuan has been working on... For me, t5540 currently segfaults on pu. I'm looking into it. -- 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