Re: [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents

From: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Date: Feb 11, 2013, 19:06 UTC
Message-ID: <20130211190629.GC2270@serenity.lan>
In-Reply-To: <7vehgmol8y.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 08:42:21AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> writes:
> 
> > Perhaps it's best to leave the patch as it originally was to guarantee
> > that we can't get stuck in graph_show_commit(), even when it's called at
> > an unexpected time, but I see you've already squashed this change in.
> >
> > Would you prefer me to resend the original patch or send an update with
> > this change and the above reasoning in the commit message?
> 
> Yes, please.  Let's have the original (I think I have it in my
> reflog so no need to resend it) and this update on top as a separate
> patch with an updated log message.

I was suggesting dropping the change to remove the graph_is_commit_finished() check in the loop. I'm not sure it buys us much and there are still situations that could result in the state changing to PADDING during the loop if the graph API is used in an unexpected way.

Are others convinced that this change is always safe?

John