Re: Funnies with "git fetch"

> I think the breakages are:
>
>  - The sending side does not give any indication that it _wanted_ to send
>    ce0136 but couldn't, and ended up sending another object;
>
>  - The pack data sent over the wire was self consistent (no breakage here)
>    and sent three well-formed objects, but it was inconsistent with
>    respect to what history was being transferred (breakage is here);
>
>  - The receiving end did not notice the inconsistency.
>
> The first one is of the lower priority, as the client side should be able
> to notice an upstream with corruption in any case. Perhaps after asking
> for objects between "have" and "want", "git fetch" should verify that it
> can fully walk the subhistory that was supposed to be transferred down to
> the blob level?