On 3/8/2022 4:37 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > Re this comment on v1: https://lore.kernel.org/git/220307.86fsntzsda.gmgdl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > Aside from whether that's a good idea, doesn't that at least point to > missing test coverage here, see traverse_non_commits() and other paths > in list-objects.c that'll call ctx->show_object(). > > I think an actually sensible patch for this is the below, i.e. the API > is conflating "do show" with "should we show AND we have a callback?": ... > I think that'll do what you want, and also seems to set us up for safer > API use going forward, i.e. we have a couple of NULL-passing callers > already. Squashing this change into the commit makes most sense to attribute authorship to you. May I forge your sign-off in that patch for v3? Thanks, -Stolee
