Re: [PATCH v6 03/12] fsck: support refs pointing to promisor objects

2017-12-07 Thread Brandon Williams
On 12/07, Jonathan Tan wrote: > On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 11:18:52 -0800 > Brandon Williams wrote: > > > Instead of requiring that every test first removes 'repo', maybe you > > want to have each test do its own cleanup by adding in > > 'test_when_finished' lines to do the removals? Just a thought. >

Re: [PATCH v6 03/12] fsck: support refs pointing to promisor objects

2017-12-07 Thread Jonathan Tan
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 11:18:52 -0800 Brandon Williams wrote: > Instead of requiring that every test first removes 'repo', maybe you > want to have each test do its own cleanup by adding in > 'test_when_finished' lines to do the removals? Just a thought. If "test_when_finished" is the style that we

Re: [PATCH v6 03/12] fsck: support refs pointing to promisor objects

2017-12-07 Thread Brandon Williams
On 12/05, Jeff Hostetler wrote: > From: Jonathan Tan > > Teach fsck to not treat refs referring to missing promisor objects as an > error when extensions.partialclone is set. > > For the purposes of warning about no default refs, such refs are still > treated as legitimate refs. > > Signed-off-

[PATCH v6 03/12] fsck: support refs pointing to promisor objects

2017-12-05 Thread Jeff Hostetler
From: Jonathan Tan Teach fsck to not treat refs referring to missing promisor objects as an error when extensions.partialclone is set. For the purposes of warning about no default refs, such refs are still treated as legitimate refs. Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan --- builtin/fsck.c |