Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] replace: forbid replacing an object with one of a different type

2013-09-06 Thread Junio C Hamano
Christian Couder chrisc...@tuxfamily.org writes: + obj_type = sha1_object_info(object, NULL); + repl_type = sha1_object_info(repl, NULL); That we can do this is somewhat curious. If an object is replaced with a different one, would it mean that this code snippet is totally bogus?

Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] replace: forbid replacing an object with one of a different type

2013-09-06 Thread Junio C Hamano
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Christian Couder chrisc...@tuxfamily.org writes: +obj_type = sha1_object_info(object, NULL); +repl_type = sha1_object_info(repl, NULL); That we can do this is somewhat curious Note that this was a comment on the sha1_object_info() API,

[PATCH v5 1/7] replace: forbid replacing an object with one of a different type

2013-09-05 Thread Christian Couder
Users replacing an object with one of a different type were not prevented to do so, even if it was obvious, and stated in the doc, that bad things would result from doing that. To avoid mistakes, it is better to just forbid that though. If -f option, which means '--force', is used, we can allow