[PATCHv4] transport: Catch non positive --depth option value

2013-11-26 Thread Andrés G. Aragoneses
>From 4f3b24379090b7b69046903fba494f3191577b20 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Andr=C3=A9s=20G=2E=20Aragoneses?= Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 12:38:19 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] transport: Catch non positive --depth option value Instead of simply ignoring the value passed to --depth option when it

Re: [PATCHv3] transport: Catch non positive --depth option value

2013-11-26 Thread Andrés G. Aragoneses
On 26/11/13 04:06, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:34 AM, "Andrés G. Aragoneses" > wrote: >> On 22/11/13 02:18, Duy Nguyen wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 3:18 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>>> Have you run the tests with this patch?

Re: [PATCHv3] transport: Catch non positive --depth option value

2013-11-25 Thread Andrés G. Aragoneses
On 22/11/13 02:18, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 3:18 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Have you run the tests with this patch? It seems that it breaks >> quite a lot of them, including t5500, t5503, t5510, among others. > > I guess it's caused by builtin/fetch.c:backfill_tags(). And th

[PATCHv3] transport: Catch non positive --depth option value

2013-11-21 Thread Andrés G. Aragoneses
>From 99e387151594572dc136bf1fae45593ee710e817 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Andr=C3=A9s=20G=2E=20Aragoneses?= Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:55:08 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] transport: Catch non positive --depth option value Instead of simply ignoring the value passed to --depth option when it

[PATCHv2] transport: Catch non positive --depth option value

2013-11-18 Thread Andrés G. Aragoneses
Instead of simply ignoring the value passed to --depth option when it is zero or negative, now it is caught and reported. This will let people know that they were using the option incorrectly (as depth<0 should be simply invalid, and under the hood depth==0 didn't have any effect). Signed-off-by

[PATCH] transport: Catch non positive --depth option value

2013-11-13 Thread Andrés G. Aragoneses
Instead of simply ignoring the value passed to --depth option when it is zero or negative, now it is caught and reported. This will let people know that they were using the option incorrectly (as depth<0 should be simply invalid, and under the hood depth==0 didn't mean 'no depth' or 'no history'