> Hm, can you say more about the context? From a certain point of view, > it might make sense for that command to succeed instead: if the repo > is already unshallow, then why should't "fetch --unshallow" complain > instead of declaring victory? A fellow in #git on Freenode was writing a script for automation and encountered this error, and asked how to find out whether a repo was shallow. My *first instinct* was to check if rev-parse had a flag for it; I wouldn't have been surprised if it did. I agree that treating it as a fatal error is a bit much in the first place, but I also think having a way to check can be useful. I also wonder if a lot of the stuff rev-parse is used for now should be moved to some sort of `git misc` command, but that's a different can of worms, so into rev-parse a new flag went. > What does git-path mean here? I wonder if it's a copy/paste error. > ... > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> Yeah, the titles were copy-pasted without adjusting, thanks for fixing, Jonathan! ;) > I agree with the fixes to the test titles suggested, so I'll queue the > patch with the fixes squashed in. Hearing "yeah, the titles were > copy-pasted without adjusting, thanks for fixing, Jonathan!" sent by > =C3=98ystein would be super nice. Sounds good. Thanks for queueing my patch. My fourth! �se
