Re: [PATCH] fast-import: checkpoint: dump branches/tags/marks even if object_count==0

> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> I think that your patch the last round that feeds fd#8 in the
>> foreground (i.e. fully trusting that the caller is sensibly giving
>> input that produces no output) is already a good place to stop.
>>
>> Your patch this round that feeds fd#8 in the background, plus the
>> attached patch (i.e. not trusting the caller as much and allowing it
>> to use commands that outputs something, within reason), would also
>> be a good place to stop.
>>
>> But I am not sure your patch this round alone is a good place to
>> stop.  It somehow feels halfway either way.
>
> I agree. If we're coding defensively against the caller, we do have to
> include your patch to be effective, you're right. I reckon we likely
> don't need to be quite so paranoid, at least until this has more
> users.