On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 01:27:00PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 04:26:48PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > (Rebased onto the tip of 'master', which is 3a06386e31 (The fifteenth > > > batch, 2023-10-04), at the time of writing). > > > > Judging from 17/17 that has a free_commit_graph() call in > > close_commit_graph(), that was merged in the eighteenth batch, > > the above is probably untrue. I'll apply to the current master and > > see how it goes instead. > > Worse than that, I sent this `--in-reply-to` the wrong thread :-<. > > Sorry about that, and indeed you are right that the correct base for > this round should be a9ecda2788 (The eighteenth batch, 2023-10-13). > > I'm optimistic that with the amount of careful review that this topic > has already received, that this round should do the trick. Unfortunately, I can't share this optimism. This series still lacks tests exercising the interaction of different versions of Bloom filters and split commit graphs, and the one such test that I sent a while ago demonstrates that it's still broken. And it's getting worse: back then I didn't send the related test that merged commit-graph layers containing different Bloom filter versions, because happened to succeed even back then; but, alas, with this series even that test fails.
