Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > I just left a rather lengthy review of the split-HEAD patch in v4. I > think hit has a few bugs that we need to address. > > I'm not sure if the right answer is to just go back to the v3 version > that simply rejected the racy HEAD update (since that's more or less > what happens now and nobody complains). > > If we do want to stick with the "silently skip the racy HEAD update" > strategy from v4, I left some fixes there. But I'd worry more about > maintainability and regressions in the future. I'm not sure if my hacky > "pretend the HEAD is this for splitting" patch is something we'd want to > carry or not. But if so, I think we could at least get a little coverage > in the test suite. Between the "honestry admit we failed and reject" and "silently pretend nothing bad happened", I'd have to say that the former may be more preferrable, and I hope people would agree.
