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

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Cc: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.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: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 15:41:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq5yn2dppk.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cSMJJem_1t0rVwjbU9SsQfBpmbE2Yn6wZeNsY=h-1MAkg@mail.gmail.com> (Eric Sunshine's message of "Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:48:20 -0400")

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.