Jacob Keller [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
We probably should release for the error case. I'll do that. I don't
believe do_submodule_path ensures that the passed in argument is
guaranteed to not be initialized or used.
Thanks,
Jake
Here's the squash for this fix.
It seems that the topic has been quiet since the message I am
responding to. Have all the issues been resolved, or are there
still some loose ends to be hashed out?
Hoping that the answer is "the former", I'll mark this topic as
"Waiting for a reroll."
Thanks.
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Jacob Keller [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
quoted
We probably should release for the error case. I'll do that. I don't
believe do_submodule_path ensures that the passed in argument is
guaranteed to not be initialized or used.
Thanks,
Jake
Here's the squash for this fix.
It seems that the topic has been quiet since the message I am
responding to. Have all the issues been resolved, or are there
still some loose ends to be hashed out?
Hoping that the answer is "the former", I'll mark this topic as
"Waiting for a reroll."
Thanks.
As far as I know they have. You mentioned a few nits in one comment,
but then said you had a re-worded message that you queued so I assumed
those nits were all squashed in. If that's correct, and you already
applied my squash for the strbuf leak I think we're good and I had
nothing coming in a future re-roll based on looking at what you have
queued in your jk/diff-submodule-inline-diff branch.
Regards,
Jake