Re: [PATCH] Segmentation fault on non-commit objects.

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > This is definitely a strict improvement over the current behavior
> > (though I agree with Dscho's comments on the error message). A few
> > further thoughts:
> >
> >   - we'll have successfully completed the rest of the clone at this
> >     point. Should we leave the objects and refs in place to allow the
> >     user to fix it up, as we do when "git checkout" fails?
> >
> >     We'd have to leave _something_ in HEAD for it to be a valid repo. I
> >     guess just "refs/heads/master" would be fine, or perhaps we could
> >     fall back to whatever the other side had in their HEAD (i.e.,
> >     pretending that "-b" wasn't specified).
> 
> Do we know for sure that the object at HEAD on the other side is a
> commit, or do we need to prepare for a case where it is not?  I
> suspect it is the latter.  HEAD needs to exist and point at a ref
> that is in refs/heads/ hierarchy, and the ref can even be unborn, so
> falling back on 'master' sounds like a good position.