Re: [PATCH 5/9] serve: provide "receive" function for session-id capability

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Sep 14, 2021, 17:12 UTC
Message-ID: <YUDYB0kQQsbKyIH9@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <YUDWoiN7wczfNwU8@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 01:06:42PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:

Show 16 quoted lines

> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 12:55:01PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:33:09AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> > > I had originally dropped has_capability() in a separate patch, to keep
> > > this one more readable. That breaks bisectability, but only with
> > > -Werror. I'm not sure where we should fall on that spectrum (I generally
> > > bisect with -Wno-error just because warnings may come and go when
> > > working with different compilers than what was normal at the time).
> >
> > I tend to fall the same way, especially when bisecting things in ancient
> > (to me) versions of Git where my current compiler complains. So I think
> > the approach that you took here is just fine.
>
> To be clear, the approach here is conservative: it will bisect even with
> -Werror. I think what you're saying is I _could_ have done the other
> approach, and put the removal into its own commit?

Yes. I would have been fine with dropping has_capability() in its own patch, since the result would have been more readable (and since I never bisect with `-Werror`). But this (the conservative approach of persevering bisect-ability even with `-Werror` is fine with me, too).

> -Peff

Thanks, Taylor