Re: [PATCH] name-rev: avoid cutoff timestamp underflow

From: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Date: Sep 23, 2019, 08:39 UTC
Message-ID: <20190923083949.GE10866@szeder.dev>
In-Reply-To: <20190923012838.3hzai6ho7vjjhkpb@camp.crustytoothpaste.net>

On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 01:42:30AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> On 2019-09-22 at 18:01:43, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> > diff --git a/builtin/name-rev.c b/builtin/name-rev.c
> > index c785fe16ba..a4d8d312ab 100644
> > --- a/builtin/name-rev.c
> > +++ b/builtin/name-rev.c
> > @@ -9,7 +9,11 @@
> >  #include "sha1-lookup.h"
> >  #include "commit-slab.h"
> >  
> > -#define CUTOFF_DATE_SLOP 86400 /* one day */
> > +/*
> > + * One day.  See the 'name a rev close to epoch' test in t6120 when
> 
> This piece of code says "close to"…
> 
> > +test_expect_success 'name-rev a rev shortly after epoch' '
> 
> …but this says "shortly after."

Thanks. I did a last minute 'close to' -> 'shortly after' edit, but apparently not everywhere.

> Overall, I think the idea is definitely sane, though.
> -- 
> brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US
> OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204