From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:50:00 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fetch-pack: fix object_id of exact sha1
Message-ID: <20160304005000.GA1074@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <CABaesJ+5B9WEqJQsK5s+WFczWMfvBgTx6UmVwjAL-WAf55zJUw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 08:35:54PM -0300, Gabriel Souza Franco wrote:

> > The code looks good to me. Do we need documentation or test updates?
> >
> > Here's a test that can be squashed in. For documentation, it looks like
> > we don't cover the "<sha1> <ref>" form at all. That's maybe OK, as it's
> > mostly for internal use by remote-http (though fetch-pack _is_ plumbing,
> > so perhaps some other remote-* could make use of it). But perhaps we
> > should document that "<sha1>" should work.
> 
> Thanks for providing a test, I hadn't looked up those yet. For
> documentation, should
> it be on the same patch or a new one? Also, I'm not exactly sure how
> to word that <refs>...
> can also contain a hash instead of a ref.

I think it make sense as part of the same patch. I guess you could still
call the argument "<refs>" even though it takes more now, and just
explain the new feature in the appropriate section. I can't think of a
better word to use (somehow "<objects>" feels too broad, and the primary
use would still be a list of refs).

-Peff