Re: [PATCH 0/2] extensions.* fixes for 2.28 (Re: [PATCH] setup: warn about un-enabled extensions)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Jonathan,

On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Jonathan Nieder wrote:

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > Here is my quick attempt to see how far we can go with the
> > "different endgame" approach, to be applied on top of those two
> > patches.
>
> Here are patches implementing the minimal fix that I'd recommend.
> These apply against "master" without requiring any other patches
> as prerequisites.  Thoughts?

IIUC all of the existing `extensions.*` predate the reverted strict check,
right? And the idea is that future `extensions.*` will only work when
`repositoryFormatVersion` is larger than 1, right?

I would have been fine with Junio's patch on top of Stolee's, and I am
equally fine with this patch series. My main aim is not so much
future-proofing, though, as it is to avoid regressions in existing setups.

Thanks,
Dscho




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux