Hi Junio,
On 2015-02-04 04:50, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
>>> [fsck "level"]
>>> missingAuthor = error
>>>
>>> , which looks funny. "level" is a constant, so it seems superfluous.
>
> Yes, it is superfluous, but is one way to avoid the ambiguity with
> "skipli
Johannes Schindelin writes:
>> [fsck "level"]
>> missingAuthor = error
>>
>> , which looks funny. "level" is a constant, so it seems superfluous.
Yes, it is superfluous, but is one way to avoid the ambiguity with
"skiplist". Structuring it like this would not be so bad, either,
though.
Hi Michael,
On 2015-02-03 16:11, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 02/02/2015 05:48 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> On 2015-02-02 13:43, Michael Haggerty wrote:
>>> On 02/02/2015 12:41 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi all (in particular Junio),
On 2015-01-31 22:04, Johannes Schindelin
On 02/02/2015 05:48 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On 2015-02-02 13:43, Michael Haggerty wrote:
>> On 02/02/2015 12:41 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>> Hi all (in particular Junio),
>>>
>>> On 2015-01-31 22:04, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>>
[...] switch to fsck.severity to address Michael
Hi Michael,
On 2015-02-02 13:43, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 02/02/2015 12:41 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> Hi all (in particular Junio),
>>
>> On 2015-01-31 22:04, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>
>>> [...] switch to fsck.severity to address Michael's concerns that
>>> letting fsck.(error|warn|
On 02/02/2015 12:41 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi all (in particular Junio),
>
> On 2015-01-31 22:04, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
>> [...] switch to fsck.severity to address Michael's concerns that
>> letting fsck.(error|warn|ignore)'s comma-separated lists possibly
>> overriding each othe
Hi all (in particular Junio),
On 2015-01-31 22:04, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> [...] switch to fsck.severity to address Michael's
> concerns that letting fsck.(error|warn|ignore)'s comma-separated lists
> possibly overriding each other partially;
Having participated in the CodingStyle thread, I
At the moment, the git-fsck's integrity checks are targeted toward the
end user, i.e. the error messages are really just messages, intended for
human consumption.
Under certain circumstances, some of those errors should be allowed to
be turned into mere warnings, though, because the cost of fixing
8 matches
Mail list logo
