From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 23:24:59 GMT
Subject: Re: [PULL] git-svn updates from Ramkumar
Message-ID: <xmqqtwzr4ofo.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150115224652.GA25482@dcvr.yhbt.net>

Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> writes:

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Thanks.  No tests necessary/feasible?  Just being curious.
>
> They seemed simple and obvious enough to me,
> (and most importantly, didn't trigger regressions).

I can see that the top-most one is about .git that is a textual
symlink ".gitdir: <elsewhere>" and the code after this part needed
to convert it to the real place in order to be able to read/write
"${GIT_DIR}/<some file>", so that is obvious to me.

But the other one just says "handle missing ref_id case correctly"
without clarifying what is incorrect in the original and how the
desired correct behaviour is different (in other words, what breaks
without this change)

To which a natural reaction was "Can the existing breakage
demonstrated by a test?".

If it is obvious for git-svn folks, then I wouldn't complain,
though.