Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> I'm not sure I buy this argument. Yes, you should not be writing
> anything else, but that does not change the fact that "fsck" will
> unceremoniously abort:
> ...
> So I think this would be a reasonable candidate (or alternatively, to
> treat EPERM on an existing file as a soft error). I am totally fine not
> to address it as part of this series, though.
Yeah, that crossed my mind (and I agree with the conclusion).
Listing what is left deliberately and why is still a good idea, as
that would force people to think twice before wasting effort to
convert blindly without thinking. Listing what is left behind like
"git fsck" that we know we shouldn't leave behind is even better to
mark low-hanging fruits. How do you like this one instead?
- git fsck, when writing lost&found blobs (this probably should
be changed, but left as a low-hanging fruit for future
contributors).
--
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