From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED137C4338F for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 22:17:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAC9460EE5 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 22:17:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235201AbhHDWRo (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Aug 2021 18:17:44 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:50786 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231249AbhHDWRd (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Aug 2021 18:17:33 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2B2A13256D; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 18:17:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=MXR/HG0uUoxq+kCihgHmJYO1SX2Z9YxdqLv1ib aCJQ4=; b=OYruGB3Nd4dHvXYSKSOzkmn0k+AHgz/xcwhSaYeVgN7xpT97d4qdIg pQIeintIBh/sgX5v/ytLE//iW84avc5ht1ELg2tJHbyARXRFuHZEIx2f6ZsXlePv fygk2j6hGDYAHLXxz+W4P8kBzEE0/t69FRoKztvNzFaC8F+64yIzc= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2E7713256C; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 18:17:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.71.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27CF613256B; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 18:17:17 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Kim Altintop Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Tan , Brandon Williams Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] upload-pack.c: treat want-ref relative to namespace References: <20210730135845.633234-1-kim@eagain.st> <20210731203415.618641-1-kim@eagain.st> <20210804203829.661565-1-kim@eagain.st> Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2021 15:17:15 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Kim Altintop's message of "Wed, 04 Aug 2021 22:04:05 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BA5E09D4-F571-11EB-96D2-D5C30F5B5667-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Kim Altintop writes: >> > + ) && >> > + git -C "$REPO" config uploadpack.allowRefInWant true >> >> I do not see a reason why the last step wants to be done outside the >> subshell, which we would be using anyway. Does it clarify something? > > I agree, but was sticking to the style that was already there. I'll then revise > the other setup steps as part of the refactor. Touching existing tests only for this, unlike the creation of a helper out of existing test to improve reuse, does not improve anything. I was curious if there was a good reason to create in a subshell and configure in a separate step, and "others do the same" is good enough to satisfy the curiousity. Thanks.