On Tue, Mar 08 2022, Derrick Stolee wrote: > 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? Sounds good! :) (Also, for anything inline or throw-away like that that I post on list it's safe to assume my Signed-off-by)
