Re: [PATCH] Test for recent rev-parse $abbrev_sha1 regression

From: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: May 30, 2007, 05:58 UTC
Message-ID: <20070530055806.GQ7044@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <7vlkf6508y.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
> 
> > My recent patch "Lazily open pack index files on demand" caused a
> > regression in the case of parsing abbreviated SHA-1 object names.
> > Git was unable to translate the abbreviated name into the full name
> > if the object was packed, as the pack .idx files were not opened
> > before being accessed.
> 
> Thanks.  As long as we catch it before it goes to 'master', it
> is not a regression ;-)

 
Good point.  Next time I won't call it a regression.

But to me, anything that hits 'next' that breaks Git this badly is a regression. Why? Because I run my production repositories off next, that's why. Of course I do this to exercise next more fully... to prevent this sort of stuff from getting to master. ;-)

For what its worth, I'm going through the code again and auditing our use of the index related variables in packed_git that are now lazily loaded. I'm not seeing anything that is critical. I do have two minor patches queued up, but they are just to make things look prettier. Will send soon.

-- 
Shawn.