Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > But I do agree in general that we should be checking as many things as > we can. I was about to say "I agree with that in principle, but there are cases where you would want to say 'if the object does not pass even this basic check, it is not worth validating it further', and verify-headers may fall into that category". That's another way of saying that something that we cannot even parse into constituent fields we cannot check the validity of each field for the semantics. However, with the current "violations of various classes can be configured out" way of doing things, that is a difficult stance to take. If you choose to accept syntax violation that makes us unable to parse, you must accept warnings and errors coming from "missing" fields due to our inability to parse and your telling us to proceed anyway. So in the end, I do agree that we should be checking as many things as we can. -- 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