Re: [PATCH 2/2] CI: don't care about SHA256 mismatch on upstream "perforce" package

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

 



On Thu, Apr 21 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 5:38 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> > Any of
>>> > the following would likely be less confusing (in no particular order
>>> > of preference):
>>> >
>>> >     * sed -i .bak -e '...' "$path"
>>> >     * rename dance
>>> >     * perl -pi -e ...
>>>
>>> That order happens to match my preference, but if the first one
>>> comes with a comment to dissuade readers to copy-and-paste the
>>> construct to other places in our code, that would be even better.
>>
>> Bikeshedding: I think I would prefer the rename-dance over a lengthy
>> comment meant to dissuade people from copying this non-portable usage,
>> especially since people often fail to read comments. The rename-dance
>> idiom, on the other hand, can be cargo-culted without harm.
>
> Yeah, that is fine, too.

I just used the rename dance in the updated v3:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover-v2-0.3-00000000000-20220422T085958Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx/



[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