On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 6:49 PM Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 03/22, Matheus Tavares wrote: > > From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Add tests for what happens when we perform a local clone on a repo > > containing odd files at .git/object directory, such as symlinks to other > > dirs, or unknown files. > > > > I'm bending over backwards here to avoid a SHA1 dependency. See [1] > > for an earlier and simpler version that hardcoded a SHA-1s. > > > > This behavior has been the same for a *long* time, but hasn't been > > tested for. > > > > There's a good post-hoc argument to be made for copying over unknown > > things, e.g. I'd like a git version that doesn't know about the > > commit-graph to copy it under "clone --local" so a newer git version > > can make use of it. > > > > In follow-up commits we'll look at changing some of this behavior, but > > for now let's just assert it as-is so we'll notice what we'll change > > later. > > > > 1. https://public-inbox.org/git/20190226002625.13022-5-avarab@xxxxxxxxx/ > > > > Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@xxxxxx> > > Helped-by: Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@xxxxxx> > > The trailers should be in the order things have happened usually. So > having Ævar's S-o-b first makes sense, but the Helped-by should come > before your S-o-b, as you made the changes first before sending out > the patch series. Ok, thanks for letting me know. I'll fix it. > When sending someone elses patch in a slightly modified version, it > may also be useful to add which parts you changed, as it was done in > e8dfcace31 ("poll: use GetTickCount64() to avoid wrap-around issues", > 2018-10-31) for example. Thanks, I didn't know about that! I searched the log and didn't see many of this on patches with 'Helped-by' tags, is there a particular case to use it or not? > Iirc, the test that is added in this patch does not work on some > platforms, notably MacOS. That would mean that we would break > bisectability at this patch on some platforms if we were to introduce > it here. Therefore I think it would be better to squash this patch > into the next one which fixes these inconsistencies. > Note that I can't test this at the moment, so this concern is only > based on previous discussions that I remember. If that's already > addressed somehow, all the better! Yes, it is already addressed :) The section of these tests that used to break on some platforms is now moved to the next patch which also fixes the platform inconsistencies. Now both patches (this and the next) work on macOS, NetBSD and GNU/Linux. Also every test and job is passing at travis-ci, except by the job named "Documentation"[1]. But, it's weird since these patches don't even touch Documentation/... And master is failing the same job at my fork as well [2]... Any thoughts on that? [1] https://travis-ci.org/MatheusBernardino/git/builds/512713775 [2] https://travis-ci.org/MatheusBernardino/git/builds/513028692
