Re: [PATCH 6/7] rev-list: let traversal die when --missing is not in use

Hi Peff, On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 09:41:13AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 10:36:48PM -0700, Taylor Blau wrote: > > > > > Of those, I think (3) is probably the best path forward. However, this > > > > patch does none of them. In the name of expediently fixing the > > > > regress

Re: [PATCH 6/7] rev-list: let traversal die when --missing is not in use

On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 10:36:48PM -0700, Taylor Blau wrote: > > > Of those, I think (3) is probably the best path forward. However, this > > > patch does none of them. In the name of expediently fixing the > > > regression to a normal "rev-list --objects" that we use for connectivity > > > checks

Re: [PATCH 6/7] rev-list: let traversal die when --missing is not in use

On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 02:41:11PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 08:37:54PM -0700, Taylor Blau wrote: > > > 3. have the traversal machinery communicate the failure to the caller, > > so that it can decide how to proceed without re-evaluting the object > > itself. > > >

Re: [PATCH 6/7] rev-list: let traversal die when --missing is not in use

On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 08:37:54PM -0700, Taylor Blau wrote: > 3. have the traversal machinery communicate the failure to the caller, > so that it can decide how to proceed without re-evaluting the object > itself. > > Of those, I think (3) is probably the best path forward. However, thi

[PATCH 6/7] rev-list: let traversal die when --missing is not in use

From: Jeff King Commit 7c0fe330d5 (rev-list: handle missing tree objects properly, 2018-10-05) taught the traversal machinery used by git-rev-list to ignore missing trees, so that rev-list could handle them itself. However, it does so only by checking via oid_object_info_extended() that the obje