On Tue, Aug 06, 2024 at 08:54:34AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > 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? Yup, we are. I was mostly aiming to reassure Jialuo, who was a bit uncertain whether his answers had been sufficient or not. Thanks! Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
