On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 11:57:53AM -0700, Karthik Nayak wrote: > > It is somewhat questionable in the first place that we declare a ref to > > be a pseudorefe depending on whether it resolves to an object ID or not. > > s/pseudorefe/pseudoref > > [snip] > > Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> via the uninitialized value when calling `is_null_oid()`, which causes > >> us to segfault. > >> > >> It is somewhat questionable in the first place that we declare a ref to > >> be a pseudorefe depending on whether it resolves to an object ID or not. > > > > If I remember rightly Karthik added that check to avoid the files > > backend calling a file with a name that matched the pseudoref syntax a > > pseudoref when it wasn't actually a pseudoref. > > Not sure I follow. I think it was strictly done to ensure we don't > consider symrefs as pseudorefs [1]. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqfrymeega.fsf@gitster.g/ And that's fair from a terminology perspective. But honestly, I really doubt that any user will understand that REBASE_HEAD is a pseudoref when it contains an object ID, but is not a pseudoref when it is a symref. Anyway, as I've said in parallel mails, I want to change the definition of what a pseudoref is. I just think that the current mess is understood by nobody and doesn't make any sense. I'll thus implicitly address this in my v2. Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
