Re: [PATCH] fast-import: checkpoint: dump branches/tags/marks even if object_count==0

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

I think that your patch the last round that feeds fd#8 in the
foreground (i.e. fully trusting that the caller is sensibly giving
input that produces no output) is already a good place to stop.

Your patch this round that feeds fd#8 in the background, plus the
attached patch (i.e. not trusting the caller as much and allowing it
to use commands that outputs something, within reason), would also
be a good place to stop.

But I am not sure your patch this round alone is a good place to
stop.  It somehow feels halfway either way.

I agree. If we're coding defensively against the caller, we do have to
include your patch to be effective, you're right. I reckon we likely
don't need to be quite so paranoid, at least until this has more
users.

Thanks.