On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > > > I actually understand now why the tests started failing: the change from > > > > resolve_ref() to get_branch() as requested by Daniel are at fault: > > > > get_branch() does not check if the branch has an initial commit. > > > > So, my vote is to revert back to resolve_ref(), even if it needs more > > lines. > > Yes, I agree, resolve_ref() is the best thing to be using here, > even if it is more code. get_branch() validates the commit and we > don't want that. We really just want to know if the current branch > is going to be updated, we don't care to what/why. It doesn't validate the commit; it doesn't even validate the symref. The resolve_ref()-using code validates the symref, and I think that's an error; we also don't care what state we'd update the current branch from. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
