Re: [PATCH 1/2] t/t1417: test symbolic-ref effects on ref logs
- From
Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com>
- Date
- Feb 1, 2021, 11:09 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAFQ2z_Mb86W7PnRfO2wcRqqS3UBOb+TpvOXQ5-UJr0aH6OnJFg@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqy2gang0e.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 12:48 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> > On Jan 30, 2021, at 11:56, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > >> The said commit came as part of this topic, ... > >> > >> https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.669.v2.git.1594401593.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/ > >> > >> ... so I've added the true author of it on the Cc: list. > > > > Out of curiosity, if Han-Wen Nienhuys is the true author of commit > > 523fa69c36744ae6 why is it that you are both the committer and author > > of that commit in the commit's header? > > See how the e-mail message was formatted in that thread. I just ran > "am" on it (which makes me responsible for committing), and the > authorship comes from the "From:" that was in the body. I suspect > he may have based the patch on some of the "how about doing it like > so" suggestions I made during an earlier discussion and wanted to > give me credit for the input, but I do not remember the context the > patch was originally written in X-<.
The classic reflog format doesn't allow '\n' in messages, but different parts of the code did try to write '\n'. This patch was supposed to sanitize the messages in a central location, so alternate ref backends do not trigger spurious differences in how reflogs are represented.
Your patch says
> has changed in an unexpected way.
Can you make the expectations and current behavior explicit?
-- Han-Wen Nienhuys - Google Munich I work 80%. Don't expect answers from me on Fridays. -- Google Germany GmbH, Erika-Mann-Strasse 33, 80636 Munich Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado