Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] object_id part 2

From: Michael Haggerty <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 10:45:29 +0200

On 06/13/2015 12:27 AM, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 03:14:25PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> "brian m. carlson" <[email-masked]> writes:
>> 
>>> While I did run the tests between each commit, I hadn't noticed
>>> they were failing because I don't have Apache installed on my
>>> laptop, so they were silently skipped.  I'll resubmit with that
>>> fixed.
>> 
>> It is somewhat strange that _only_ http part had failures like
>> this, and is unnerving, too, given that a few people seem to have
>> given at least a cursory read over the patches and didn't spot
>> anything obviously wrong.
>> 
>> Was that because there was a single manual botch, or was that
>> merely that other parts of the system do not have sufficient test
>> coverage?
> 
> It appears that I broke the change in "parse_fetch: convert to use 
> struct object_id" which modifies remote-curl.c, so I think it's a
> single manual botch.  I'm going to rework that patch anyway since
> Michael said that he didn't like the idea of parse_oid_hex as it
> stands, so it will end up being mostly moot.

In the same email where I made those design suggestions, I also I
pointed out a bug in the implementation of parse_oid_hex(). Maybe that
is the reason for the test failures.

Michael

- -- 
Michael Haggerty
[email-masked]