Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 01:34:20PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> > The tests all look quite reasonable to me. Touching .git/refs like this
>> > is a bit gross (and something we may have to deal with if we introduce
>> > reftables, etc). But it's pretty pervasive in this file, so matching
>> > the existing style is the best option for now.
>> ...
> Yeah, I agree completely that we could be using rev-parse in this
> instance. But it's definitely not alone there:
> ...
Yup, this morning I was reviewing what we said in the previous day's
exchanges and noticed that you weren't advocating but merely saying
it is not making things worse, and I agree with the assessment.
Perhaps two #leftoverbits are to
(1) clean up this test to create refs using "update-ref", and
verify refs using "show-ref --verify".
(2) If (1) had to leave some direct filesystem access due to the
built-in safety that cannot be circumvented, decide which is
more appropirate between a test-update-ref test helper only to
be used in tests, or a "--force" option usable to corrupt
repositories with "update-ref", implement it, and use it to
finish cleaning up tests.
Thanks.
