Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Subject: [PATCH v2] submodule: check for NULL return of > get_submodule_ref_store() > > Maybe more imperative, telling what we actually want > to achieve instead of what we do? > > submodule: report deleted submodules as not initialized > >> If we can't find a ref store for a submodule then assume it the latter >> is not initialized (or was removed). Print a status line accordingly >> instead of causing a segmentation fault by passing NULL as the first >> parameter of refs_head_ref(). > > Thanks for the message here. Looks good! > ... > Which would be added in t/t7400-submodule-basic.sh > > Thanks for coming up with a sensible patch! I take the above to mean that you as a contributor active in this area like the general idea in the patch but not volunteering to take this topic over and instead trust René to tie the loose ends with a reroll, taking hints from your suggestions? I just wanted to make sure that we won't be confused whose turn it is next (e.g. me waiting for update to t7400 from you or René doing the same). Thanks.
