Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: >> > But if "git refs verify" does exercise all the new code paths (and >> > the refactored code that existed before this series, sitting now in >> > different places), then I do not have to worry about it. My question >> > was primarily to extract "even though we do not wire this up to fsck, >> > we already have another code paths that uses all these changes" out >> > of you. >> ... > So, to summarize: the refactored functionality is both used and tested > and I think it's sensible to defer the integration of git-fsck(1) and > git-refs(1). After refactoring, existing functionality about objects are used, of course, (there is no other code that does so), the refactoring lets the code to learn to perform checks on references, and these new checks are exercised by "git refs verify". I took what shejialuo said that way, and that is fine by me when I said the above ;-). So I think we all are on the same page? Thanks.
