Re: [PULL] git-svn updates from Ramkumar
Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> writes:
Show 5 quoted lines
> 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.