Re: [PATCH 2/2] CI: don't care about SHA256 mismatch on upstream "perforce" package

From: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: "Eric Sunshine" <sunshine@sunshineco.com>,
	"Git List" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Derrick Stolee" <stolee@gmail.com>,
	"SZEDER Gábor" <szeder.dev@gmail.com>,
	"Taylor Blau" <me@ttaylorr.com>,
	"Johannes Schindelin" <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] CI: don't care about SHA256 mismatch on upstream "perforce" package
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:22:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <220422.86czh95v74.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqq5yn2dppk.fsf@gitster.g>

On Thu, Apr 21 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 5:38 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
>>> > Any of
>>> > the following would likely be less confusing (in no particular order
>>> > of preference):
>>> >
>>> >     * sed -i .bak -e '...' "$path"
>>> >     * rename dance
>>> >     * perl -pi -e ...
>>>
>>> That order happens to match my preference, but if the first one
>>> comes with a comment to dissuade readers to copy-and-paste the
>>> construct to other places in our code, that would be even better.
>>
>> Bikeshedding: I think I would prefer the rename-dance over a lengthy
>> comment meant to dissuade people from copying this non-portable usage,
>> especially since people often fail to read comments. The rename-dance
>> idiom, on the other hand, can be cargo-culted without harm.
>
> Yeah, that is fine, too.

I just used the rename dance in the updated v3:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover-v2-0.3-00000000000-20220422T085958Z-avarab@gmail.com/